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

Re: ~intrusive_ptr bug?
by Jean-François Brouillet 18 May '05

18 May '05

>> intrusive_ptr(T * p, bool add_ref = true); >> Effects: if(p != 0 && add_ref) intrusive_ptr_add_ref(p);. >> >> Postconditions: get() == p. > > [...] > > Right, so you can't call it a bug if the implementation does > exactly as stated. ;-) Consider: X * x = new X ; { intrusive_ptr<X> px(x) ; } Here, x is destroyed, and rightly so. Now (same example as yesterday): X * x = new X ; { intrusive_ptr<X, false> px(x) ; } Here, x is destroyed *too*, even though the additional "false" was supposed to mean: "please, don't mess-up with refCounts at all, *I* have everything under control. Nope. If preserving the current intrusive_ptr semantics is paramount (as I kind of sense it is now), some confusion could be avoided by renaming "addRef" to something less ambiguous or suggestive. The question is not _how_ it does what it does (it does it by adding 1 to the refCount, or not, hence that dubious name) but _what_ it does when that argument is set to false. If it is difficult to find a name to describe _what_ it does in such a case (which might point to a poorly understood use-case) then the next best thing is probably a catch-all word such as "standard", which, by negation (=false) means a clear warning: "What you're about to do when setting ``standard'' to false is, by definition non standard, and you *must* understand so and so to avoid being caught with your pants down" > I'm pretty sure that a shared_ptr-based port can closely > approximate the original, "approximate"! That's the key. I don't want to "approximate". Either I find a way to *completely* hide the smart pointer modulo: - the initial "new X" - "on the fly" packaging of ``this'' when required __from within__ (ie when passing ``this'' to some other unrelated method of some other class that requires an _envelope_ as argument and not a _body_, since my whole API, once translated from Java, will only expose _envelopes_) or I will go the painful Boehm's road and use conservative GC. > but a custom smart pointer would probably be a better choice for > idiomatic Java code. I wish you are right! I'll give myself all the evenings and week-ends until the end of May. If I fail to come up with something that is acceptable, I'll go conservative, because "Real artists ship!" :-) > As for intrusive_ptr, its main strength is that it has the size > of a pointer. HoHum ...scoped_ptr shares this "exclusive" strength ... > Adding a boolean would likely meet serious opposition. Never mind the opposition. Is that the right thing to do or not? Since I don't understand your use cases, I just can't comment. > Your requirements are very interesting, however, and point to a > shared/intrusive hybrid along the lines of: > > template<class T> class intrusive_ptr_2 > { > T * px_; > intrusive_ptr<Object> pn_; > > // insert smart pointer boilerplate here ;-) > }; I'm not sure I understand. pn_ is supposed to perform the refCounting part, and px_ is supposed to be the actual _body_ ? > It's an intrusive pointer that's close to shared_ptr in expressive > power; you can use it to point to a subobject, for example. > > Extending intrusive_ptr to accommodate the above along the lines of > > template<class T, class U = void> class intrusive_ptr > { > T * px_; > U * pn_; // not present when U == void > }; > > could be feasible. I'm lost. I don't see how this relates to the problem of providing an indirection ("pointer") construct such that, once you've have written xxxx_ptr<X> p(new X) ; you're done, once and for all, never asking _user_ code to deal with the intricacies of your xxxx_ptr *implementation*. When you come to think of it, a garbage collector is meant to provide _automatic_ garbage collection, not semi-automatic, or half-manual. Compounding the problem of memory management with additional idiosyncratic problems is not going to free that one remaining brain cell out of a total of 7, that holds the whole universe under your current consciousness level. A bad guarantee is worse than no guarantee at all. IMHO :) Many thanks -- JFB

2 1

RE: [Boost-users] Re: fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost serialize
by Olivier Vanden Bos 18 May '05

18 May '05

/Zm do not change anything in this case. I use the 1.32 version, with the .Net project , but the parameters for the boost project are not concerned, as the compiler block when compiling my files in my project. Actually I am trying to have feedback from Microsoft... http://www.kbalertz.com/kb_883655.aspx - VDB - "LNK1210: exceeded internal ILK size limit" -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Robert Ramey Sent: 18 mai 2005 15:53 To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] Re: fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost serialize Look at the command line switches used by bjam for this platform. Also, the 1.32 and 1.33 packages include premade VC 7 projects with command line switches set. Look at them. Definitely use /Zm800 among others. Robert Ramey Olivier Vanden Bos wrote: > It's just my signature :) (bad idea, I can see that) > The real error is > > Fatal Error C1204 : compiler limit : internal structure overflow > The compiler has run out of memory. Your program needs to be > simplified, perhaps by splitting a large source code file into > smaller files. > > And i found a mail about that "[Boost-users] serialization library - > Serializing classes from a DLL", that didnt not solve my case > (identical) but explain it :P > It is just that the work around (splitting the file) becomes very hard > to apply , actually i need to put one BOOST_DCL for each file !!! > > > - VDB - > > > -----Original Message----- > From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org > [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Arne Vogel > Sent: 17 mai 2005 03:35 > To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: Re: [Boost-users] fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost > serialize > > Olivier Vanden Bos wrote: > >> I ve got a lot of this, i m forced to split all declarations of >> classes in separate .cpp file. >> >> In fact, Boost::serialize become unusable... >> >> Does somebody have a solution ? >> >> **- VDB - ** / / >> / "//LNK2019: unresolved external symbol//"/ >> * * >> > > Could you be more specific about _what_ symbols are unresolved? > > - Arne Vogel > > > _______________________________________________ > Boost-users mailing list > Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

1 0

RE: [Boost-users] Re: fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost serialize
by Olivier Vanden Bos 18 May '05

18 May '05

I just tried. Nothing changed. - VDB - "LNK1210: exceeded internal ILK size limit" -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Flinn Sent: 18 mai 2005 15:14 To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] Re: fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost serialize "Olivier Vanden Bos" <olivier.vanden-bos(a)ubisoft.com> wrote in message news:930168C299A0C44D905F4B11995AD744013FD607@UBIMAIL2.ubisoft.org... > It's just my signature :) (bad idea, I can see that) > The real error is > > Fatal Error C1204 : compiler limit : internal structure overflow > The compiler has run out of memory. Your program needs to be simplified, > perhaps by splitting a large source code file into smaller files. Have you tried using: #define BOOST_NO_ARGUMENT_DEPENDENT_LOOKUP in your translation unit previous to any serialization header inclusions? Jeff Flinn _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

1 0

RE: [Boost-users] fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost serialize
by Olivier Vanden Bos 18 May '05

18 May '05

It's just my signature :) (bad idea, I can see that) The real error is Fatal Error C1204 : compiler limit : internal structure overflow The compiler has run out of memory. Your program needs to be simplified, perhaps by splitting a large source code file into smaller files. And i found a mail about that "[Boost-users] serialization library - Serializing classes from a DLL", that didnt not solve my case (identical) but explain it :P It is just that the work around (splitting the file) becomes very hard to apply , actually i need to put one BOOST_DCL for each file !!! - VDB - -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Arne Vogel Sent: 17 mai 2005 03:35 To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] fatal error C1204 on MS .Net with boost serialize Olivier Vanden Bos wrote: > I ve got a lot of this, i m forced to split all declarations of > classes in separate .cpp file. > > In fact, Boost::serialize become unusable... > > Does somebody have a solution ? > > **- VDB - ** / / > / "//LNK2019: unresolved external symbol//"/ > * * > Could you be more specific about _what_ symbols are unresolved? - Arne Vogel _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

4 3

Intefaces (BIL) IDL formating
by Tim Michals 18 May '05

18 May '05

I'm trying to figure out how would you format the IDL function for a general function like printf? For example the function is printf( const char *fmt, ...) How you format the IDL function? BOOST_IDL_FN1(formatMsg, const char *fmt)

2 1

Using Boost with Tandem
by Kick Damien-DKICK1 18 May '05

18 May '05

I was able to find one e-mail in the archives asking about using Boost on Tandem but I was unable to find a reply. Not a good sign <smile>. I currently find myself using the Tandem Development Suite cross compiler for Windows version G06.15 with Cygwin and I hoping I can use Boost, too. Any help?

2 1

building boost.test with mac os X
by Simmons, Aaron 18 May '05

18 May '05

I am unable to build boost.test 1.32.0 on MacOS X 10.3/10.4. The build fails due to some undefined symbols. On MacOS 10.3, these symbols are: cpp_main(int, char**) test_main(int, char**) init_unit_test_suite(int, char**) On 10.4, these symbols are __Z8cpp_mainiPPc __Z9test_mainiPPc __Z20init_unit_test_suiteiPPc Does anyone know why this is happening and how to fix it? Thanks. Below is the output of the first of these link errors on 10.3: darwin-Link-DyLib-action builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darwi n/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/libboost_prg_exec_monit or-sd-1_32.dylib ld: Undefined symbols: cpp_main(int, char**) DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH=builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_m onitor.dylib/darwin/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true export DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH ld -dynamic -m -r -d -o "builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darw in/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/libboost_prg_exec_moni tor-sd-1_32.lo" "builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darw in/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/execution_monitor.o" "builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darw in/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/cpp_main.o" \ && \ c++ -static-libgcc -g -Wl,-dynamic -nostartfiles -Wl,-dylib -Wl,-ldylib1.o -o "builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darw in/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/libboost_prg_exec_moni tor-sd-1_32.dylib" "builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darw in/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/libboost_prg_exec_moni tor-sd-1_32.lo" \ \ \ && \ rm -f "builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darw in/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/libboost_prg_exec_moni tor-sd-1_32.lo" ...failed darwin-Link-DyLib-action builddir/bin/boost/libs/test/build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darwi n/debug/runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/libboost_prg_exec_monit or-sd-1_32.dylib... ...skipped <@boost!lib>libboost_prg_exec_monitor-sd-1_32.dylib for lack of <@boost!libs!test!build/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darwin/debug/run time-link-static/shared-linkable-true>libboost_prg_exec_monitor-sd-1_32. dylib...

2 1

Boost question about static method of a class
by kauai 18 May '05

18 May '05

Hi all, Just wondering if I can do this with Boost: I have a number of classes that all have the same static method with the same arguments. I want to register these classes somewhere/somehow so that later on I can do something like: aClassName::StaticMethod(pData, len); // for example At runtime aClassName whould be the actual class, for example would resolve to: BobsClass::StaticMethod(pData, len); In Java I think I would use the class "Class" to do something like this, but dont know how in C++. Thanks for any help, -K __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

RE: [Boost-users] [spirit] parse(iter,iter,rule)
by Hartmut Kaiser 17 May '05

17 May '05

Sorry... > Thorsten Ottosen wrote: > > > Shouldn't it be possible to parse with the following syntax: > > > > std::string text( "fooooo"); > > static rule<> r = *space_p >> '"' >> > > (*alnum_p)[assign_a(name)] >> '"'; > > parse_info<std::string::const_iterator> info = > > boost::spirit::parse( text.begin(), text.end(), r ); > > > > How do I otherwise interpret > > > > http://www.boost.org/libs/spirit/doc/scanner.html > > > > ? > > It should be: > > std::string text( "fooooo"); > static rule<std::string::iterator> r = > *space_p >> '"' >> (*alnum_p)[assign_a(name)] >> '"'; > parse_info<std::string::const_iterator> info = It should be: parse_info<std::string::iterator> info = > boost::spirit::parse( text.begin(), text.end(), r ); Regards Hartmut

2 4

a generic factory for boost
by martin f krafft 17 May '05

17 May '05

I cannot find a generic factory implementation in boost. I have implemented my own, lightweight and header-only factory class: libfactory++ [http://freshmeat.net/projects/libfactory] which I would like to make available to boost. It takes a somewhat curious approach to custom constructors (using the Command pattern), and it still has a TODO list that's non-empty, but I would be happy to submit this work to boost. Question is: is there interest for this? View the tree online: http://xrl.us/f4r5 [0] 0. http://arch.madduck.net/cgi-bin/archzoom.cgi/madduck@arch.madduck.net--2005… -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck invalid/expired pgp subkeys? use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! spamtraps: madduck.bogus(a)madduck.net your eyes are weary from staring at the CRT. you feel sleepy. notice how restful it is to watch the cursor blink. close your eyes. the opinions stated above are yours. you cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.

2 3