April 2012 - Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[Review Request] Inclusion of the Boost.Polygon Voronoi Library
by Andrii Sydorchuk 04 Jul '12

04 Jul '12

Boost community, It has been two years since I started development of the Voronoi library as part of the Google Summer of Code 2010. Finally I feel that the library is ready to become public and would like to request a review for the inclusion into the Boost.Polygon library. Features: - Robust and efficient implementation of the sweepline algorithm that allows to construct Voronoi diagram, Delaunay triangulation and medial axis of a set of points and line segments. - Coordinates of the output geometries are computed within the 64 machine epsilon relative error (6 mantissa bits). - Voronoi diagram data structure that allows efficient traversal and data association with the output Voronoi graph. - No 3rd party dependencies (e.g. GMP, MPFR), all the required multiple precision types are implemented as part of the library. - The input and output coordinate type domains are configurable via coordinate type traits, thus allowing to compute coordinates of the Voronoi vertices within any required precision. - The full construction of the Voronoi diagram of 100 000 points takes only 0.27 seconds (see benchmarks). The full list of features could be found here: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_main.htm Limitations: - Input geometries should have integer coordinates; - Input segment data sets should not contain intersection points, except segment's endpoints. Information on why the first limitation is not sufficient is explained here: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_advanced_tutorial.htm The second limitation could be waved using native Boost.Polygon functionality: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/gtl_polygon_set_concept.htm Resources: The code is already merged with the Boost.Polygon sandbox branch. All the Voronoi related files are prefixed with "voronoi". - Code location: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl - Main documentation page: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_main.htm or http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/index.htm - Benchmarks: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_benchmark.htm - Examples: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/libs/polygon/example/output_data/ - Tests: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/libs/polygon/test/ - Tutorials: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_basic_tutorial.htm and http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_advanced_tutorial.htm - Official Google+ page: https://plus.google.com/b/109395909314556242008/ Review manager: I would kindly ask Simonson, Lucanus J. the author of the Boost.Polygon library to be my review manager. PS. The library was designed in a user friendly way, so I would invite everyone to give it a try! No configuration of the geometric or predicate kernels is required. Simply follow the basic tutorial: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/gtl/doc/voronoi_basic_tutorial.htm Thanks and have fun, Andrii

11 86

hex/unhex()?
by Olaf van der Spek 19 Jun '12

19 Jun '12

Hi, Does Boost have hex/unhex() that support std::string? I can't find them and I think they'd be quite handy to have. -- Olaf

7 35

[Locale] VC11 Regressions
by Joshua Boyce 18 Jun '12

18 Jun '12

I am currently porting some code to the VC11 compiler beta, and as part of that process I ran the unit tests on the libraries I use and noticed some failures in Boost.Locale under VC11 that are not present under VC10. Ones of the tests (test_winapi_collate) actually crashes (showing the WER dialog etc). Logs for comparison (tests were run on trunk): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74751/cpp/boost/logs/locale-test-vc10-20120330-2143… http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74751/cpp/boost/logs/locale-test-vc11-20120330-2143… Has anyone else observed this or is it a configuration issue on my end?

4 11

status of sp_counted_base_solaris.hpp
by Graham Bennett 07 Jun '12

07 Jun '12

Hi all, I'm interested in getting boost::shared_ptr to use atomic ops on Solaris. I notice there is an implementation using the OS-provided atomics in boost/detail/sp_counted_base_solaris.hpp, but it doesn't seem to be included. According to this thread: http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2006/07/107144.php, it seems the reason might be that it wasn't possible to come up with a proper preprocessor condition to include it on the right versions of Solaris. I'm considering modifying my boost installation to include this header on Solaris - does anyone know of any issues with the code, or can they confirm that it has been well tested? Are there any other reasons for its omission? Thanks, Graham -- Graham Bennett

4 7

[fusion] Trouble using BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_ADT with boost::fusion::operator<
by GOODHART, TAYLOR 17 May '12

17 May '12

Hi all, I'm attempting to adapt a third-party struct into a fusion sequence using BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_ADT to get access to a nice operator<. Unfortunately compilation fails and I'm not sure if it's a bug or me using the library incorrectly. As best I can read the error message, it looks like the code is attempting to compare adt_attribute_proxy structs instead of the values represented by these. Below is some code that demonstrates the problem. Can anybody help me out? Thanks, Taylor #include <boost/fusion/adapted/adt/adapt_adt.hpp> #include <boost/fusion/adapted/struct/define_struct.hpp> #include <boost/fusion/adapted/struct/adapt_struct.hpp> #include <set> #include <string> #include <boost/fusion/sequence/comparison/less.hpp> struct test1 { std::string s; const std::string & getS() const { return s; } void setS( const std::string & s_) { s = s_; } }; BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_ADT( test1, (const std::string &, const std::string &, obj.getS(), obj.setS(val)) ) BOOST_FUSION_DEFINE_STRUCT( , test2, (std::string, s) (int, a) ) struct test3 { std::string s; }; BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_STRUCT( test3, (std::string, s) ) using boost::fusion::operator<; int main( int argc, char * argv[]) { //Fails /*std::set<test1> destinations1; destinations1.insert(test1());*/ std::set<test2> destinations2; destinations2.insert(test2()); std::set<test3> destinations3; destinations3.insert(test3()); return 0; }

3 7

[config] 4 new C++11 macros added
by John Maddock 14 May '12

14 May '12

A long time back I was asked for a bunch of new config macros which have finally now been added: BOOST_NO_CXX11_ALLOCATOR The standard library does not provide a C++11 version of `std::allocator` in <memory>. BOOST_NO_CXX11_ATOMIC_SP The standard library <memory> does not support atomic smart pointer operations. BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_FUNCTIONAL The standard library does not provide a C++11 compatible version of <functional>. BOOST_NO_CXX11_SMART_PTR The standard library header <memory> has no shared_ptr and unique_ptr. Enjoy, John.

6 11

[complex] Feedback and Potential Review Manager
by Christopher Kormanyos 13 May '12

13 May '12

Hi Matthieu, I would like to provide a detailed feedback on the proposed Boost.Complex. I am terribly sorry about the late response on this, as I was not doing well in winter when this topic was more active. First of all, great work with this, Matthieu. I believe the community desperately requires this facility. Boost.Complex appears to have two main goals: A) Provide acceleration for pure imaginary numbers. B) Allow complex to be used with user-defined types. For goal B), I have briefly tested parts of the Boost.Complex code with the cpp_dec_float multiprecision data type proposed for Boost.Multiprecision by John Maddock. My Tests include: * Test some elementary transcendental functions. * Test the overall package via computation of orthogonal polynomials.* My test file (complex.cpp) is included in this e-mail. * Visual Studio 2010, SP1. * Proposed Boost.Multiprecision and boost trunk. Remarks: 1) Various functions use macros like M_PI_2. These macros do not provide enough precision for a multiprecision type. And they will be inefficient for some fixed-point types. Perhaps you need to "bite the bullet" and use boost::math::constants. (Is M_PI_2 even part of C++, or is it only lurking around in <math.h> of GCC?) 2) Ditto for the LN_10 and LN_2 constants. Does boost::math::constants support ln_ten()? I do know that it has ln_two(). 3) I disagree with explicit complex(const T& re = T(0.), const T& im = T(0.)) I believe this constructor should be non-explicit. See ISO/IEC 14882:2011, Section 26.4.2. 4) I would really like to see global operators for seamless interaction of complex<T> with integer PODs. The proposed code of boost::complex forces explicit construction from integer "all the way" to boost::complex<T> just to, for example, multiply with 2. This is extremely costly as most multiprecision or fixed-point types have specially optimized routines for multiplication with integer PODs. Perhaps something like this would be good template<typename T> complex<T> operator*(const complex<T>& z, int n) { T re(z.real()); T im(z.imag()); re *= n; im *= n; return complex<T>(re, im); } 5) In the exp() function, polar() can not be resolved without explicit template parameter. Instead of this: template<typename T> inline complex<T> exp(const complex<T>& x) { return polar(exp(x.real()), x.imag()); } I needed this: template<typename T> inline complex<T> exp(const complex<T>& x) { return polar<T>(exp(x.real()), x.imag()); } I don't know who's right here, your code or the compiler. 6) The tanh() function and some other functions compute the exponent twice. By that I mean both exp(x) as well as exp(-x). I believe that division would be faster if exp(-x) were computed with (1 / exp(x)). Or is there an issue with branch cuts that mandates the potentially redundant calculation? 7) I hope to find time to test this code further with a tiny fixed-point class. But I might be too busy for that extra work. REVIEW PROGRESS: I may potentially be qualified for review manager. I do know the math and the code. I am also well-versed with all aspects of software review, assessment and audit situations. BUTTT!!! I'm not as good at C++ as some of you folks and I'm a real beginner at boost. Nonetheless, If nobody better steps forward, I could potentially manage the review of Boost.Complex. Best regards, Chris.

8 33

[hash] Turn on BOOST_HASH_NO_IMPLICIT_CASTS by default
by Daniel James 12 May '12

12 May '12

Hello everyone, There have been occasional issues where Boost.Hash will incorrectly hash an object that doesn't have a hash function but is convertible to bool. I added an extra templated overload of hash_value which contains a static assert. The idea is that it's a better match than the implicit cast, so it will cause a compile error in this case. This is currently only activated when a macro is defined, as it could break otherwise valid code. I was a bit worried about making any interface changes because at this stage, Boost.Hash should be very stable from release to release. The problem turned up again yesterday, so I'm starting to think it's enough of a problem that it's worth activating this be default. A different solution might be to change the implement of Boost.Hash for bools, so that the bool overload isn't required. But that would be treating the sympton, as other implicit casts could cause problems. An example of valid code that will now break is something like: struct base; std::size_t hash_value(base const&); struct derived : base { void some_method_but_no_extra_state(); }; boost::hash<derived> derived_hash; Currently that will automatically use base's hash_value, with this change it will be a compile error. Although that might be a good thing, as sometime it is an error to use the base's hash function. Of course, there will be a macro to keep the old behaviour. Any objections to this change?

3 5

Re: [boost] [Review Request] Multiprecision Arithmetic Library
by Christopher Kormanyos 11 May '12

11 May '12

Sorry, John my file was too big and admin rejected post. The candidate file is now 7-zip and should make it through. <snip> >> I experimented with FFTs. We need your inputs if we *really* >> want to make very high-precision available at this stage. <snip> >> maybe about 30 lines of code. > Nice, had no idea it could be implemented in such a small space! Ooops, my bad. It was 100 lines. I guess I was in a daze by then. <snip> > So my gut feeling is to hold off for now, and maybe do things > properly later (dynamic allocation, better std lib support etc)? I agree. We should pull the reigns on it for now. We won't get the reliability we need if we try to do something fast. I could go on indefinitely with big-numbs, but we have to get that first version potentially reviewed. I should really get back to my book project soon. But I'm definitely in on any relevant review issues. > I think the existing ones work out quite nicely now thanks, > I could use some ideas for integer and maybe rational number examples, > but that's a whole other ball game ;-) I'm not an integer guy. Maybe someone could help us out here. But what springs to my mind is: * Prime factorization * Greatest common denominator (GCD) * Primality testing for Mersenne Primes (has an exceptionally simple algo) * MD5, SHA-1, 2, etc. (but cool std::uint32_t reference apps already exist)<snip> >> I resolved the excessive guard digit issue and reduced the guard digits >> to the necessary amount (and provide rationale in a code comment). <snip> > Sure, or mail me a patch and I'll run the full tests > (or you can - just cd into libs/multiprecision/test and > do a "bjam --enable-specfun" and then wait for a long time!) > Thanks, John. OK. I attached my proposed version in /big_number/multiprecision/cpp_dec_float.hpp. The diffs include the removal of some non-needed constants, the trimming of max_digits10 and a minor improvement to the multiplication. Thanks, Chris.

4 29

[reference_wrapper] add operator()(Args...) to reference_wrapper
by Philipp Moeller 10 May '12

10 May '12

Given that Boost now has perfect forwarding emulation through Boost.Move and a better result_of, would it be possible to enable reference_wrapper to forward the function call operator? The current behavior is somewhat surprising and makes a few of the most promising applications of reference_wrapper (reference wrap polymorphic boost::function objects) impossible with code that is no prepared to work with reference_wrapper. It would also be more consistent with reference_wrapper of the stdlib. I can file a corresponding bug report and add a patch, if there is interest. Cheers, Philipp Moeller

2 5