November 2019 - Boost-users - lists.preview.boost.org

Boost.Numeric.Interval: Please specify rounding control mechanism
by Bastien Commelongue 01 Dec '20

01 Dec '20

Hello, I am building an app for IOS (ARM) and I had this issue while compiling: *Boost.Numeric.Interval: Please specify rounding control mechanism.* C99 version should be used in this case but __USE_ISOC99 is not defined. Modifying the condition with this code (using __cplusplus) fixed the issue: *boost/numeric/interval/hw_rounding.hpp(36)* *#if defined(BOOST_NUMERIC_INTERVAL_NO_HARDWARE) && (defined(__USE_ISOC99) || defined(__MSL__) || (defined __cplusplus && __cplusplus >= 201103L))# include <boost/numeric/interval/detail/c99_rounding_control.hpp>#endif* Let me know if I missed something or if you plan to integrate this modification in a next version. Cheers, Bastien Commelongue

2 1

[Urgent] ./bootstrap.sh from boost_1_70_0 is failing in SunOS
by kamallochan Jena 11 Dec '19

11 Dec '19

Hi All, Thanks for your support!!! In SunOS platform, The bootstrap.sh from boost_1_70_0 failed with error " ./build.sh: syntax error at line 143: `machine=$' unexpected " Can any one look into it and kindly suggest how to fix this issue and proceed further. *It is blocking our current project build!!!* *PFB, the details:* $ uname -a SunOS kamal Generic_150401-55 i86pc i386 i86pc $ cd 3rdparty/boost/tools/build $ ls boost-build.jam bootstrap.bat CONTRIBUTING.rst example Jamroot.jam notes src bootstrap_vms.com bootstrap.sh doc index.html LICENSE.txt README.rst test $ ./bootstrap.sh -n Bootstrapping the build engine with toolset sun... Failed to bootstrap the build engine Consult 'bootstrap.log' for more details $ cat bootstrap.log ./build.sh: syntax error at line 143: `machine=$' unexpected Thanks, Kamal

5 15

[review][fixed_string] FixedString review starts today
by Joaquin M López Muñoz 05 Dec '19

05 Dec '19

The Boost formal review of Krystian Stasiowski and Vinnie Falco's FixedString library starts today November 25 and extends up to December 4. Description FixedString provides a dynamically resizable string of characters with compile-time fixed capacity and contiguous embedded storage in which the characters are placed within the string object itself. Its API closely resembles that of std::string. Repo and docs GitHub repository: https://github.com/18/fixed_string Online docs: https://18.github.io/doc/fixed_string Review questions Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: - What is your evaluation of the design? - What is your evaluation of the implementation? - What is your evaluation of the documentation? - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? I invite you to submit your review, either publicly to the developers or the users lists, or else, if for whatever reason you don't want to go public, directly to me. Thank you for investing your time on reviewing Krystian and Vinnie's work and for contributing to the advancement of Boost. Best regards, Joaquín M López Muñoz Review manager for candidate Boost.FixedString

4 3

Write Property Tree JSON on a single line
by aCPlusPlusDeveloper 29 Nov '19

29 Nov '19

Is it possible to force the boost::propertytree::write_json method to write the entire json tree on a single line (not human readable at all but to save file size)? Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

1 0

Interest in a C++20 Unit Testing Framework?
by Krzysztof Jusiak 27 Nov '19

27 Nov '19

Hi, I was wondering whether there is any interest in exploring a C++20 single header/single module, macro-free Unit Testing Framework with no dependencies? Github: https://github.com/boost-experimental/ut Additional links: - Try it online: https://godbolt.org/z/uVDxkW - Benchmarks: https://github.com/boost-experimental/ut#benchmarks - How it works?: https://github.com/boost-experimental/ut#how-it-works Thanks, Kris

10 20

Building with CMake?
by Robert Dailey 25 Nov '19

25 Nov '19

I see that individual repositories like boostorg/filesystem on Github have a CMakeLists.txt. But the boostorg/boost super repo doesn't have a root CMakeLists.txt. Either this doesn't follow standard CMake structure or there's no way to build with CMake globally instead of bjam. How can I build the boost libraries with CMake?

9 15

Re: [Boost-users] [boost] Interest in a C++20 Unit Testing Framework?
by Krzysztof Jusiak 24 Nov '19

24 Nov '19

I see your point, but I'm not advocating here for providing multiple ways of doing the same thing as I agree it might be confusing although I'd also argue that it's already a case with boost.test for example (single header/static/shared library or BOOST_TEST, BOOST_CHECK, BOOST_CHECK_EQ accomplish pretty much the same things but there are also a trade-offs here so it depends) Also, having a possibility for users to do so is valuable IMHO but I wouldn't expose any macros from the library. On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 9:55 AM Hans Dembinski <hans.dembinski(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 23. Nov 2019, at 04:31, Krzysztof Jusiak via Boost < > boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > > However, with [Boost].UT there is nothing stopping anyone from using > simple > > macros (one-lines) to achieve other frameworks syntax > > The good bit about it is that it's an opt-in 'feature' as opposed to > being > > the only available option (see example below [1]). > > But then you have split in the user base, some will use the macros others > will use the macro-free syntax, and both will have difficulty in > understanding the code of other. > >

1 0

Re: [Boost-users] [boost] Interest in a C++20 Unit Testing Framework?
by Vinnie Falco 24 Nov '19

24 Nov '19

On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 9:49 AM Hans Dembinski via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > both will have difficulty in understanding the code of other. BOOST_TEST(b) What could this possibly mean? /me scratches head Regards

1 0

boost::regex (implementation question)
by John Emmas 23 Nov '19

23 Nov '19

Yesterday I downloaded boost v1.71.0 The file 'regex/v4/cregex.hpp' contains declarations for functions like 'regexecA' and 'regexecW'. There are similar declarations for regfree, regcomp & regerror. But where are the implementations for those functions? Or is my own app expected to provide them? Many thanks, John Emmas

2 4

Re: [Boost-users] [boost] Interest in a C++20 Unit Testing Framework?
by mateusz＠loskot.net 23 Nov '19

23 Nov '19

<quote author='Boost - Users mailing list'> (CC'ed to boost-users) On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 21:53, Vinnie Falco via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 7:24 AM Krzysztof Jusiak via Boost-users > <boost-users(a)lists.boost.org>> > > I was wondering whether there is any interest in exploring > > a C++20 single header/single module, macro-free Unit > > Testing Framework with no dependencies? > > I have no interest in a library that requires C++20, especially > considering that C++20 is not even official yet but also because once > C++20 is released, there will be hardly any users for many years. This > project seems very much like it was written "just because", to use the > latest language features, rather than for pragmatic reasons. I don't > see anything compelling to use it over Boost.LightweightTest for > example. I had a look at the current documentation and examples, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only sceptical about it. My opinion is very similar to what Hans, Raffi and Vinnie explained. Macros in testing and benchmarking frameworks are kosher, in fact, they can be very helpul to organize and structure large amount of tests that in turn makes it easier to search and browse through the code. I can't imagine how any of the modern IDE's will support the string-driven syntax. As a long time maintainer of SOCI library, I'm no stranger to the syntax-first library development [1], still, I find the UT's string-based test cases approach as an interesting curiosity with very little practical value. (It falls into similar drawer as the (over)use of emoji in commit messages on GitHub :)). Boost is known as a C++ guinea pigs playground, so any library can make it in. If it does, I just hope Boost will not allow to adopt the UT as a test framework of choice of any/too many of its libraries. [1] https://www.drdobbs.com/database/a-simple-oracle-call-interface/184405930?p… Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users </quote> Quoted from: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Interest-in-a-C-20-Unit-Testing-Framewor… _____________________________________ Sent from http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com

1 0