April 2014 - Boost-users - lists.preview.boost.org

Fix for annoying bug / library maintenance
by Filip Konvička 30 May '14

30 May '14

Hi, https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4964 This is out there for years. To me this seems to be clearly explained and a fix is provided, but apparently all bugs assigned to 'bgubenko' aren't monitored (for years there has been no reaction). So is there a way of getting the fix ever applied? Or are such unmaintained libraries just doomed to eventually die, despite the efforts of the people reporting bugs and posting patches? Thanks, Filip

4 5

[test]Legacy support - Boost 1.34.1 with MSVC 6
by Kerry, Richard 29 May '14

29 May '14

I've just started trying to use Boost's Test module. Trouble is I'm still stuck with Visual Studio 6(SP6), so I believe I need to stick with Boost 1.34.1 as the last properly supported for VC6. I'm having trouble getting the examples even to compile (ie exec_mon_example.cpp). Does anyone have any pointers to known incompatibilities between Boost 1.34.1 and VC6SP6 ? Or whether there is a more recent version where the Test module will work with VC6 ? I am well aware of how old VC6 is and would like to move forward. The major aim of getting Boost.Test working with VC6 is to give some confidence that any port to VC12 is working satisfactorily. Regards, Richard. Richard Kerry BNCS Engineer, SI SOL Telco & Media Vertical Practice T: +44 (0)20 3618 2669 M: +44 (0)7812 325518 Lync: +44 (0) 20 3618 0778 Room G300, Stadium House, Wood Lane, London, W12 7TA richard.kerry(a)atos.net<mailto:richard.kerry@atos.net>

3 2

Boost test and openmpi
by Martin Vymazal 21 May '14

21 May '14

Hello, I have the following code: #define BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK #define BOOST_TEST_MODULE mpi_functionality #include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp> #include "mpi.h" struct MPI_Functionality_Fixture { MPI_Functionality_Fixture() { m_argc = boost::unit_test::framework::master_test_suite().argc; m_argv = boost::unit_test::framework::master_test_suite().argv; } int m_argc; char** m_argv; }; BOOST_FIXTURE_TEST_SUITE( MPI_Functionality_TestSuite, MPI_Functionality_Fixture ) BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE( mpi_functionality_parenv_init ) { MPI_Init(&m_argc,&m_argv); } BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE( mpi_functionality_parenv_finalize ) { MPI_Finalize(); } BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END() The code compiles fine, but I have the following problem when I try to run it. When I run as 'mpirun ./my_executable' or 'mpirun -np 3 ./my_executable' everything goes fine. On the other hand, when I run as ./my_executable I get the following error: unknown location(0): fatal error in "mpi_functionality_parenv_finalize": unrecognized signal Outside of Boost, it is perfectly possible to write a program which calls MPI_Init and MPI_Finalize and it does not have to be used with mpirun. I wonder if this (different) behavior of Boost test is normal. I did not find any remarks regarding Boost test and mpi in the tutorial. Best regards, Martin Vymazal

5 11

[Test] Boost.Test for Property Tree Issue
by Pritesh Acharya 19 May '14

19 May '14

Boost version: 1.55.0 OS: Windows 8 IDE: Visual Studio 2010 I have a small class which just parses a std::string using boost::property_tree::read_json. I'm trying to test my method with invalid input to make sure my method handles the exception. However, when I execute GetPropertyTreeFromJsonInValidInput2 (source code in attachment), I get exception in the visual studio itself and I have to break the execution. (snapshot is included in attachment). I'm a new user of boost, so don't know where to look for the solution.

2 1

"Trac thinks your submission might be Spam. To prove otherwise please provide a response to the following."
by Nico Schlömer 16 May '14

16 May '14

Hi all, I would like to make contributions to Boost on trac <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost>, but whenever I would like to make comment a bug report, it gets recognized as spam, and I'm redirected to a captcha-page that I think should contain a captcha, but does _not_ <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/captcha#trac-add-comment>. Any hints? Cheers, Nico

5 8

[Date Time] time_period has not default constructor
by Pablo Madoery 30 Apr '14

30 Apr '14

I am using the library Date Time, in particular the object time_period. I was wondering why (if there is a good reason) this class has not a default constructor. the default constructor result usefull when using for example a map with the operator [] or when using serialization from Boost. ptime class has default constructor. If a time_period is formed by two ptime objects, why time_period has not its default constructor as well. Thanks

1 0

allocating shared memory fails beyond 8 GB
by vipin sachdeva 30 Apr '14

30 Apr '14

Hi, I am using managed_xsi_shared_memory to allocate memory as below: boost::interprocess::managed_xsi_shared_memory shmem(boost::interprocess::create_only, key, atol(argv[2])); For some reason, I cannot allocate more than 8 GB of memory. Both sysctl and ipcs have limits higher than that set (output below). ------ Shared Memory Limits -------- max number of segments = 1874919423 max seg size (kbytes) = 9765624999999 max total shared memory (kbytes) = 39999999999999996 min seg size (bytes) = 1 kernel.shmmax = 9999999999999999 kernel.shmall = 9999999999999999 kernel.shmmni = 1874919423 vm.hugetlb_shm_group = 0 Is there any reason why this allocation should fail ?

2 5

[typeindex v3.0] Peer review begins Mon 21st ends Wed 30th
by Niall Douglas 30 Apr '14

30 Apr '14

Dear Boost, A second round of community review begins for proposed Boost.TypeIndex on Mon 21st, lasting ten days. I should apologise as it's my fault for starting another peer review straight after Boost.Align ends, however I was busy as Google Summer of Code admin until today, and I will be preparing to talk at C++ Now straight after this review ends. I hope that this doesn't affect the community's willingness to contribute to the review. Reminder of the report from the last TypeIndex v2.1 review: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-list/TeiSdkRkUF0 Reminder of the original peer review announcement: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/TypeIndex-Peer-review-period-for-li brary-acceptance-begins-ending-Thurs-21st-Nov-td4654788.html Source code: https://github.com/apolukhin/type_index/zipball/master Github: https://github.com/apolukhin/type_index Documentation: http://apolukhin.github.com/type_index/index.html Changes in TypeIndex v3.0 since v2.1 (from my own review of it): 1. Documentation is hugely improved over v2.1, lots of side by side examples illustrating the differences and similarities. 2. You can now create your own custom type indices using an extensible framework. 3. boost::typeind::type_info now exports raw_name() and pretty_name() to maximise MSVC-GCC compatibility, and to solve point 1 but not point 2 in the v2.1 report. 4. The undefined behaviour trick used in v2.1 has been replaced with a cast via the placeholder type boost::typeind::detail::ctti_data which can be viewed in https://github.com/apolukhin/type_index/blob/master/include/boost/type _index/ctti_type_index.hpp. There is an explanation in the comments there about this technique's compatibility with the C++ standard. 5. TypeIndex now defines everything in the boost::typeind namespace instead of the boost namespace. So: 1. What is your evaluation of the design? 2. What is your evaluation of the implementation? 3. What is your evaluation of the documentation? 4. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? 5. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? 6. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? 7. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: 8. Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Thanks, Niall -- Currently unemployed and looking for work in Ireland. Work Portfolio: http://careers.stackoverflow.com/nialldouglas/

5 7

update cycle
by Philipp Kraus 30 Apr '14

30 Apr '14

Hello, I try to compile Boost myself under OSX and the thread library runs into compiler errors. I have seen that the fix is inserted into the repo, so I would like to wait to a new Boost release. The last Boost version (1.55.0) was released on November 2013, so my question is in which cycles are new releases created (half a year)? Thanks Phil

1 0

Boost::Interprocess - using variadic template args with managed_shared_memory::construct()
by james 28 Apr '14

28 Apr '14

Hi, I'm trying to write a wrapper over some of boost::interprocess and I want to have a function like this: template <typename T, typename... Args> T* Wrapper::createStruct(const std::string& name, Args&&... args) { return m_shm->construct<T>(name.c_str())(std::forward<Args>(args)...); } This fails to compile as it seems boost::interprocess uses its own varargs scheme when I try to create the following struct in the SHM through this wrapper function: struct Custom { Custom(int a, int b) : m_a(a), m_b(b) { } int a; int b; } int main() { ... Custom* c = shm->createStruct("Custom", 1, 2); } The error message: /usr/include/boost/interprocess/detail/named_proxy.hpp:79:7: error: no matching function for call to ‘test_sharedmemory::sharedmemory_custom::test_method()::Custom::Custom()’ { new((void*)mem)T(boost::forward<Args>(get<IdxPack>(args_))...); } ^ /usr/include/boost/interprocess/detail/named_proxy.hpp:79:7: note: candidates are: /home/james/dev/infinityplus/test/common/shm/sharedmemory/main.cpp:136:7: note: test_sharedmemory::sharedmemory_custom::test_method()::Custom::Custom(int, int) Custom(int one, int two) ^ /home/james/dev/infinityplus/test/common/shm/sharedmemory/main.cpp:136:7: note: candidate expects 2 arguments, 0 provided Is there any way I can get this to work? I'd rather my wrapper's interface used std only. boost 1.55 c++11 g++ 4.8.2 TIA, James

2 1