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

[ASIO] directory monitor ASIO extension
by Szymon Gatner 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

Hi, I am going through code of directory monitor ASIO extension by Boris Schäling (http://www.highscore.de/boost/dir_monitor.zip) and I am wondering: what is the benefit of making this piece of code / library an ASIO extension. It just feels like it could be easier to use and implement if it wasn't? I hope I am missing something tho and looking here for enlightenment ;) Regards, Szymon Gatner

5 13

why lockfree/queue.hpp requires has_trivial_assign and has_trivial_destructor to template type T
by 何子杰Hzj_jie 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

hi, all,as new to boost, i am looking for a solution to combine boost::lockfree::queue with std::function, i.e. boot::lockfree::queue<std::function>, but unfortunately, the implementation of the lockfree queue required the T to be trivial assignable and trivial destructible.with some basic investigation to the implementation of boost::lockfree::queue, the assignment operator is using when pop or unsynchronized_pop, it calls detail::copy_payload, which is using operator= or constructor and operator=. though overloaded assignment operator may use more time and cause the pop function to wait for longer time, i do not see it would block the logic.for the destruction, queue implementation always calls pool.template destruct instead deallocate, which means even for a default destructor, it will also be called. so is this a defect or by-design behavior of the lockfree queue? thank you in advanced. .Hzj_jie

3 5

[msm] State Machine and Dependency Injection
by Kris 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

Hi, Recently I have implemented Dependency Injection library, which I proposed to boost last week (http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/is-there-any-interest-in-a-dependency-in…) Right now I wanted to shared how dependency injection might be integrated with Boost.MSM (eUML) and would really glad for any feedback. Boost.MSM is a great library, unfortunately actions/guards have to have empty constructor and whole logic has to be handled via Finite State Machine. Such approach is hard to maintain and test, so would be great to have possibility to implement action/guards without FSM dependency and with proper dependency injection instead. More information: http://krzysztof-jusiak.github.io/di/boost/libs/di/doc/html/di/examples/int… Hello World: class guard : public euml_action<guard> { public: guard(shared_ptr<data> data = nullptr, shared_ptr<other_data> = nullptr); // default constructor is required by eUML template<typename TEvent> bool operator()(const TEvent&) const; // no FSM dependency }; class action : public euml_action<action> { public: action(shared_ptr<data> data = nullptr, shared_ptr<other_data> = nullptr); // default constructor is required by eUML template<typename TEvent> void operator()(const TEvent&); // no FSM dependency }; class state_machine_ : public state_machine_def<state_machine_> { public: using initial_state = state1; BOOST_MSM_EUML_DECLARE_TRANSITION_TABLE(( state1() + event() [guard()] / action() == state2() ), transition_table) }; using state_machine = back::state_machine< state_machine_ , back::use_dependency_injection // Boost.DI dependency injection policy >; auto sm = di::make_injector().create<state_machine>(); // create state machine / actions, guards and their dependencies will be injected via DI framework sm.process_event(event()); Hot it works? * we do implement actions/guards with any dependencies we need * we add use_dependency_injection policy in state machine definition * we create state machine using dependency injection framework library What MSM with DI actually give us? * actions/guards are really easy to test / code doesn't require FSM dependency - loosely coupled * signature change of actions/guards may not require binding configuration changes (if it's not an interface or it's an interface already bound) * FSM is just a declarative abstraction - we don't need to test it * we can use all DI goods for controlling how dependencies will be injected - see https://github.com/krzysztof-jusiak/di Project (with workings tests): https://github.com/krzysztof-jusiak/msm Comparison between usage of Boost.MSM with DI and without it: http://krzysztof-jusiak.github.io/di/boost/libs/di/doc/html/di/examples/int… Looking forward to hear from you. Any feedback is more than welcome. Cheers, Kris -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/msm-State-Machine-and-Dependency-Injecti… Sent from the Boost - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

1 0

[1.56.0] Release candidates available
by Marshall Clow 04 Aug '14

04 Aug '14

Release candidate files for 1.65.0 are available at http://boost.cowic.de/rc/ As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. This helps ensure the candidates build OK before we push them out to SourceForge. The files (and associated md5s) are: MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc1.7z) = 0ac22b92b24209286d48e4c41925cd9f MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc1.tar.bz2) = 5b5bfa99244b1ac5737323decceb19c2 MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc1.tar.gz) = 2047cdd4e09cda34e7f10fec0f821175 MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc1.zip) = 0c544f6acc85550b15cdc9221f2ac0c9 Thanks! -- The release managers

7 11

[serialization] Please help me solve this compile error.
by Paul Blampspied 04 Aug '14

04 Aug '14

I am tearing my hair out over this, partly because I believe the code used to compile. I just can't see what the problem is. I enclose all the pertinent code as I cannot say which bits are irrelevant. There are two classes: ManagedArray which is an array of data without size or capacity data (this is stored elsewhere). PersistentManagedArray which I wrote to enable ManagedArrays to be serialized. The error message is produced in 'main': error: no match for 'operator<<' in 'oa << PersistentManagedArray<int>((* & size), (* & capacity), (* & ints))' It seems to me that I have defined the necessary serialize member function with the right signature. Commented out is code I wrote some time ago which used separate load and save functions. This, I believe, used to work. #include <fstream> #include <boost/archive/binary_oarchive.hpp> #include <boost/archive/binary_iarchive.hpp> #include <string> using namespace std; //**************************************************************************************************************************** template<class T> class ManagedArray { public: T *values; ManagedArray() { values = NULL; } ~ManagedArray() { if (values) { delete [] values; } } //Changes array size. If array grows, the new values are unintialized. void resize(unsigned oldSize, unsigned newSize) { if (oldSize==newSize) return; T *newValues = (newSize==0) ? NULL : new T[newSize]; if (oldSize!=0) { T *oldValue, *newValue; T *end = values + (oldSize<newSize ? oldSize : newSize); for(oldValue=values, newValue=newValues; oldValue<end; oldValue++, newValue++) { *newValue = *oldValue; } } if (values) { delete [] values; } values = newValues; } //Changes array size. If array grows, the new values are initialised to copies of a prototype, initValue. void resize(unsigned oldSize, unsigned newSize, T &initValue) { if (oldSize==newSize) return; T *newValues = (newSize==0) ? NULL : new T[newSize]; T *oldValue = values; T *newValue = newValues; if (oldSize!=0) { T *oldEnd = values + (oldSize<newSize ? oldSize : newSize); for(; oldValue<oldEnd; oldValue++, newValue++) { *newValue = *oldValue; } } T *newEnd = newValues + newSize; for(; newValue<newEnd; newValue++) { *newValue = initValue; } delete [] values; values = newValues; } inline T &operator[](unsigned index) { return values[index]; } inline const T &operator[](unsigned index) const { return values[index]; } }; //**************************************************************************************************************************** //This class helps to save a ManagedArray in a Boost archive // Usage: // ar & PersistentManagedArray(size, capacity, array); template<class T> class PersistentManagedArray { public: PersistentManagedArray(unsigned &size, unsigned &capacity, ManagedArray<T> &managedArray) : _size(size), _capacity(capacity), _managedArray(managedArray) {valueArrayExists = (_managedArray.values!=NULL);} private: unsigned &_size; unsigned &_capacity; ManagedArray<T> &_managedArray; bool valueArrayExists; friend class boost::serialization::access; // template<class Archive> // void save(Archive & ar, const unsigned int version) const { // ar & valueArrayExists; // if (valueArrayExists) { // for(unsigned i=0; i<_size; i++) { // ar & _managedArray.values[i]; // } // } // } // template<class Archive> // void load(Archive & ar, const unsigned int version) { // _managedArray.values = NULL; // ar & valueArrayExists; // if (valueArrayExists) { // _managedArray.resize(0, _capacity); // for(unsigned i=0; i<_size; i++) { // ar & _managedArray.values[i]; // } // } // } // BOOST_SERIALIZATION_SPLIT_MEMBER() template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive & ar, const unsigned int version) { ar & valueArrayExists; ar & _size; ar & _capacity; if (Archive::is_loading::value) { delete _managedArray.values; _managedArray.values = new T[_capacity]; } for(unsigned i=0; i<_size; i++) { ar & _managedArray.values[i]; } } }; int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { ManagedArray<int> ints; unsigned size; unsigned capacity; string fileName = "data.xxx"; ofstream file(fileName.c_str(), ios::out|ios::binary); if (file.good()) { boost::archive::binary_oarchive oa(file); oa << PersistentManagedArray<int>(size, capacity, ints); //This line does not compile ! } }

4 4

[1.56.0] Release Candidate 2 available
by Eric Niebler 04 Aug '14

04 Aug '14

We've created a second release candidate to fix a few issues. The three fixes since RC1 are listed at the end of this mail. The files for 1.56.0 RC2 are available at: http://boost.cowic.de/rc/ As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. The files (and associated md5s) are: MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc2.7z) = 2e1688886aede1c3348e131a0e73a031 MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc2.tar.bz2) = 2079fabbfb9fb046e6e12e381eff20fa MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc2.tar.gz) = 96fe9c5f70759399217dc7ee113ecdd3 MD5 (boost_1_56_0_rc2.zip) = df42b60e120841fc3893de7c2529fc4a Thanks! -- The release managers === Changes Since RC1 === Boost.Thread bug is causing coroutine build to fail on gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode. https://github.com/boostorg/thread/pull/21 Boost.Graph broken on MSVC-12 and gcc-4.4. https://github.com/boostorg/graph/pull/14 Boost.System broken on cygwin, local_free_on_destruction not defined. https://github.com/boostorg/system/pull/4

3 2

[MultiIndex] Indexing integers
by Sensei 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

Dear all, I am experimenting with MultiIndex, and I am happy with my custom classes. Now I am wondering, can I index integers without a custom class? For instance, say we have a 32 bit unsigned integer, how can I index these with respect to the MSB or LSB? My first guess is using a union, something like union uint32_u { uint32_t data; uint16_t bits[2]; }; // define a multiply indexed set with indices by id and name typedef boost::multi_index::multi_index_container< uint32_u, boost::multi_index::indexed_by< // sort by MSB boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::member<employee, uint16_t, uint32_u.bits[0]>>, // sort by LSB boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::member<employee, uint16_t, uint32_u.bits[1]>>, > > integer_set; But I cannot obviously compile it. Is there a way I can do this? Thanks!

2 12

[boost][sync?] "Distributed" value (or something...)
by Klaim - Joël Lamotte 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

I would like to ask Boost developers and users: 1. Am I the only one seeing the following pattern in my concurrent systems code? 2. Is there already some tools available in Boost that does what I describe here and that I am not aware of? 3. If not, would there be any interest in the tool I'm describing here or not? Is it a dumb idea? (I keep getting back to this idea but I'm surprised not finding anything similar online) The pattern that I am seeing occurs when: 1. I have a value or a set of values in an object or several objects which value(s) describe some kind of configuration that several other systems will read and use. 2. The object(s) will be updated only by one thread (at a time). 3. When the object's value is modified, all the systems that rely on the object's value have to be notified so that they update themselves using that value. 4. The systems I am refering to can use different threads for updating and we can assume that they are running concurrently. 5. It is not important that the source object's value is synched with the reader's values at all time, however it is important that the sequence of changes to the source object's value is signaled to the readers exactly in the same order and "as fast as possible", but delay is ok. The simplest solution to solve this is to have a mutex locking the value and the systems checking the value regularly. (that is, using syncrhonized_value for example) However the locking and looping reads might not be necessary if it is done in another way (if I am correct, I still lack experience in the domain). The solution that I am thinking about would look like this. ///////// // The object containing the value used by the other systems. class System_A { distributed_source<int> m_foo_count; // changes to this object will be sent to "readers"... public: System_A() : m_foo_count(42) ... {} //... // thread-safe read-only access distributed_value<int> make_foo_count_reader() const { return distributed_value<int>{ m_foo_count }; } }; ///////// // The different systems acquire a read access to the value. class System_B { distributed_value<int> foo_count; // read-only value reflecting System_A::m_foo_count's value since last update. public: SystemB( const System_A& system_a, ... ) : m_foo_count( system_a.make_foo_count_reader() ) { // setup the initial config... on_foo_count_changed( *m_foo_count ); // trigger some processing when SystemA::foo_count's value have been changed: m_foo_count.on_changed( [this]( int new_value ){ // called after the value have been changed m_work_queue.push( [=]{ // will be executed on the next update cycle for this system... on_foo_count_changed( new_value ); / }); }); } //... private: void update_cycle( const UpdateInfo& info ) { // ... // the following is just to clarify: const int foo_before = *m_foo_count; // the value is not updated yet, but we can still use it m_work_queue.execute(); const int foo_after = *m_foo_count; // the value might have been udpated if( foo_before != foo_after ) { // the value have been updated (though you don't need to do this if you used the callback instead). } //... }; }; //////// // At some point the value is changed by the system owning the source object... System_A::change_foo( int new_value ) { m_work_queue.push( [=]{ // will be executed on the next update cycle of this system... // ... *m_foo_count = new_value; // assign the new value then send the new value to the readers... }); } System_A::something_complex( std::function<void(int&)> some_work ) { m_work_queue.push( [=]{ // ... m_foo_count.update( some_work ); // execute on the current value then send the resulting value to the readers }); } Some notes: a. The names are just invented while I write this email. b. I suppose that the distributed_source might have an interface similar to synchronized_value, anyway I didn't get farther than this idea. c. I see several different ways to implement this idea, some might be more efficient than others but I didn't do any tests yet (by lack of time). Thoughts?

2 4

Re: [Boost-users] [MSM] how to use a compilation firewall around inner state machines
by Mark.Bartosik＠thomsonreuters.com 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

Repost from different email client (prior ate linefeeds, sorry again). I have a state machine implemented with MSM (eUML) that currently has 80 transitions, there are two inner state machines. Compilation time is not great, but I have been dealing with it by BOOST_MSM_FAVOR_COMPILE_TIME and using parallel compilation where possible. Slow compilation time is an irritation and productivity killer, but my larger worry is that eventually the compiler will run out of memory. Especially as I will likely have to add another inner state machine with about 40 more transitions. Current we are using VS2008 but planning on moving everyone in the team to the VS2012 toolset but running under the VS2013 environment. I don't know if this will help, I doubt it. Currently compilation memory usage is up to 2.5GB per translation unit. So I would like to use a compilation firewall around the inner state machines. My plan is to implement concrete types for the inner state machines, with a process_event function: boost::msm::back::HandledEnum process_event( const boost::any & event ); Then within this function test for each event type to be handled by the inner state machine, and forward to a regular MSM state machine contained within the inner concrete type. I am hoping that this, plus on_entry and on_exit functions is about all I need to do. I expect that I will be able to get this to work, although an example on how to put a concrete wrapper around an inner state machine would be great, and importantly a list of limitations and work arounds for this technique would be helpful. My problem is that the outer state machine transition table has rows like this: exit_pt_( inner_state, inner_state_some_pseudo_exit_state ) / do_some_stuff() == outer_s2, exit_pt_( inner_state, inner_state_other_pseudo_exit_state ) / do_other_stuff() == outer_s3, If inner_state becomes a concrete type, then I don't know if this can be handled, and if so how? My best idea so far is for the inner_state to call process_event on the outer state machine and rewrite the outer machine's state transition table thus: inner_state + some_synthetic_event / do_some_stuff() == outer_s2, inner_state + other_synthetic_event / do_other_stuff() == outer_s3 The xxxx_synthetic_event's would be generated from within the inner state machine when it reaches one of the pseudo exit states. So in summary I would like to know: 1) Is there a documented example of putting a concrete wrapper around a inner state machine. 2) What is the list of limitations of doing this. e.g. exit_pt_ not working. 3) How should I deal with transitions in the outer state machine that were making use of exit_pt_ P.S. I've got to say that I think MSM is great! thanks - - Mark

2 1

Re: [Boost-users] [serialization] Please help me solve this compile error.
by Brian Wood 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

Bjorn Reese writes: On 07/30/2014 04:01 AM, Paul Blampspied wrote: >> boost::archive::binary_ oarchive oa(file); >> oa << PersistentManagedArray<int>(size, capacity, ints); //This line does not compile ! > > The stream operator in Boost.Serialization does not take temporary > objects, so create the PersistentManagedArray<T> object on a separate > line, and then pass it to the stream. The C++ Middleware Writer <http://webEbenezer.net> supports temporary objects. Here's an example: front_messages_middle::Marshal(sendbuf, cmw::marshalling_integer(::strtol(argv[1],0,10))); It doesn't support PersistentManagedArray, but I'm willing to consider adding support for that. More info here - http://webEbenezer.net/about.html -- Brian Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net

1 0