April 2005 - Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[typeof] help needed with porting
by Arkadiy Vertleyb 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Hi everybody, If anybody can try or has recently tried the proposed typeof library with any compilelr, other than GCC or MSVC, can you please let me know what the results are? You can take the library at its usual place: http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/vault/, typeof.zip Thanks a lot in advance. Regards, Arkadiy

6 14

Boost to the rescue
by Fernando Cacciola 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Hi people, A link to this was recently posted in c.l.cpp.m but I thought you all would like to read it... http://www.neward.net/ted/weblog/index.jsp?date=20050413#1113402903230 Enjoy Fernando Cacciola

13 16

[Boost-bugs] [ boost-Support Requests-1190931 ] bcc55 internal error compiling example simple_ls.cpp
by SourceForge.net 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Support Requests item #1190931, was opened at 2005-04-27 04:40 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=207586&aid=1190931&group_… Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: bcc55 internal error compiling example simple_ls.cpp Initial Comment: I have environment variable BCCROOT set properly. Yet, I get many warnings and internal error in the end. Warnings are of three types: 1. Warning W8097 ...../boost/config/auto_link.hpp 240: Not all options can be restored at this time 2. W8062 ...../boost/config/abi_prefix.hpp 22 (and 25 - the same) : Previous options and warnings not restored 3. W8026 ...../boost/limits.hpp 86: Functions with exception specifications are not expanded inline (this one I understand what it means) Fatal F1004 simple_ls.cpp 74: Internal compiler error at 0x40638d with base 0x400000 in function main(int, char * *) Fatal F1004 simple_ls.cpp 74: Internal compiler error in function main(int, char * *) ---------------------------- I need some help... please. Does anyone know how to compile anything with bcc 5.5.1 and boost libraries ? Thank You. Holy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=207586&aid=1190931&group_… ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans! Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey Click here to start! http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id=105hix _______________________________________________ Boost-bugs mailing list Boost-bugs(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-bugs

1 0

[program_options] Recent changes
by Vladimir Prus 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Hello, just before feature freeze, I've committed some changes to program_options: - the command line parser was refactored. For historic reasons, it has its own data structures for representing options, and now it uses the options_description class. The internals were also cleaned up. - the 'implicit' option flag was removed. I've asked for comments on this some time ago, and no objections was raised. - some methods of 'options_description' and 'option_description' classes were removed - In 1.32, the 'additional_parser' could return only a single option. There's a new method of command line parser -- 'add_style_parser', which can be used to specify a function that can return vector<option>. This might be convenient, for example, for parsing response files Except for 'implicit' removal, those changes should not affect users of the library. However, I'd appreciate if user test the new version and report any problems. - Volodya

5 21

few questions about regex V3 vs V4
by Bronek Kozicki 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Few questions about regex V3 : 1. what parts of boost.regex are available in V3? I just found (to my embarassment during discussion with my boss) that regex_replace is not available in V3. 2. what compilers are known to not work with V4, or (more precisely) : is there any reason to force MSVC6 into V3? 3. assuming that we build regex library files in V4, is it OK (well-defined behaviour) to link these .dll and .lib with code compiled with regex V3? TIA -- Bronek Kozicki brok(a)rubikon.pl http://b.kozicki.pl/

3 3

Re: [boost] Any Interest in a 3-D Vector library?
by Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

--- Stefan Koch <maillist(a)isolda.com> wrote: > Any interest in a templatized class for 3-Dimensional vectors? > (Similar in style to std::complex or boost math/octonion and > math/quaternion.) FYI: A few years ago I put together cooperating classes for 3-dim vectors, 3x3 matrices and 3x3 symmetric matrices (storing only the six unique elements): http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/cctbx/scitbx/include/scitbx/vec3.h?vi… http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/cctbx/scitbx/include/scitbx/mat3.h?vi… http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/cctbx/scitbx/include/scitbx/sym_mat3.… See also: http://cctbx.sourceforge.net/ It is all open source (BSD style). Feel free to take what you find useful. Cheers, Ralf __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

3 3

logos in boost image
by Stefan Slapeta 26 Apr '05

26 Apr '05

Hi all, I really wonder who is interested in shipping the images of the boost logo contest (in the more subdir). This increases the size of the boost by about 2 megs and is of no use for most of the boost users! Stefan

5 12

RE: [boost] Re: Logging Library -- Formal Review Request
by Bennett, Patrick 26 Apr '05

26 Apr '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of Peter Simons > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 5:55 AM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: [boost] Re: Logging Library -- Formal Review Request > > Patrick Bennett writes: > > > Having worked on quite a few large-scale commercial > > software products using an extensive logging framework > > for quite a few years now, I can attest that, short of > > embedded deployment, there is almost never a reason to > > compile out tracing code. > > Except for, when the tracing code comes with serious > performance penalties. Then you really want to be able to > compile a version with all the debugging and tracing > statements removed. Nope, in the system we use, the tracing code isn't even called unless tracing is actually enabled (which can be done in realtime from other processes). The only overhead incurred for any logging statement currently not active is little more than a lookup, compare, and jump. >From the discussion I've seen, the proposed library should work the same way. Patrick Bennett

2 1

RE: [boost] Re: Logging Library -- Formal Review Request
by Bennett, Patrick 26 Apr '05

26 Apr '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of John Torjo > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 3:12 PM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Logging Library -- Formal Review Request > > > > > Nope, in the system we use, the tracing code isn't even called unless > > tracing is actually enabled (which can be done in realtime from other > > processes). The only overhead incurred for any logging statement > > currently not active is little more than a lookup, compare, and jump. > >>From the discussion I've seen, the proposed library should work the same > > way. > > > > Yup, it does work the same way -- except that for my lib there's not > even a lookup. Every log internally is a reference to a variable of > boost::log::logger type, which contains a pointer to a > boost::log::logger_impl, which contains a boolean variable. > [Bennett, Patrick] By lookup, I was referring (very) loosely to a pointer indirection. The handles in this system are actually statically defined raw ('opaque' handles) pointers to shared memory structures, so comparisons are *extremely* cheap [as you well know]. Patrick Bennett

1 0

RE: [boost] Logging Library -- Formal Review Request
by Bennett, Patrick 26 Apr '05

26 Apr '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of Jody Hagins > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 11:40 AM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: Re: [boost] Logging Library -- Formal Review Request > > On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:16:03 -0400 > Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I think John's approach to having multiple log "levels" is to just use > > a separate log for each one (e.g. you might have logs called trace, > > debug, warning, info, and fatal). Logs are either enabled or > > disabled; there is no "level" or above-some-threshold-type checking as > > with some other common implementations. > > > Unfortunately, you lose relativity in logs, which is very important in > diagnosing failures. Suppose a problem occurs that gets logged to the > "fatal" log. Really, to find out all surrounding context, you need to > merge all logs. Unless there is a common sequence number or something > like that, you have no way of really knowing what sequence of events led > to the problem since they are scattered about in a number of logs. You > can make good guesses, but in large that handle multiple requests at the > same time, it becomes very difficult. > > I'd prefer a common log, which records levels. > > I also think the concept of multiple log variables is important in large > systems, where different subsystems may have different log levels (e.g, > turn on all logging for new subsystems, and only critical logging for > other subsystems). [Bennett, Patrick] Agreed. With the current system I use, there are have multiple logging 'topics,' each of which can be assigned real-time a 'current' tracing/verbosity level. Each logging macro is defined as being a particular verbosity level as well - so things like status/notes/warning/error/etc. break down into general verbosity level ranges. A specific message type is associated with the message as well, although it typically matches the verbosity definition. Specific topics can then be associated with one or more logging 'sinks.' Logging a message for any given topic will only happen if its currently set level is >= the level the message is defined to log at. The message then gets sent to all associated sinks (for output across the network, to disk, to the console, etc.). The topics are associated with the named 'subsystem' (typically a friendly version of the process name) [the subsystem/topic name is what defines a unique topic] and can be modified from other management processes by adjusting levels per subsystem or by topics used by it. In my mind at least, it would be nice to see the boost logging library adopt some of these concepts. Patrick Bennett

1 0