July 2013 - Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[preprocessor] ARRAY_REPLACE bug?
by Mostafa 25 Jul '13

25 Jul '13

On Windows 7/Cygwin, using boost 1.53, preprocessing the following snippet: pp_array.cc ----------- #include <boost/preprocessor.hpp> //#define BOOST_PP_TUPLE_REM_0() // nothing #define ARRAY (3, (a, x, c)) BOOST_PP_ARRAY_REPLACE(ARRAY, 1, b) via: g++ -E -P -I /... pp_array.cc gives the following incorrect result: (3, (BOOST_PP_TUPLE_REM_0 () a, b , c)) Uncommenting the pound define in the snippet gives the correct result for the preprocessor. Is this a bug?

1 0

[dynamic_bitset] Compiler intrinsics to accelerate. whos agree?
by Jairo Andres Velasco Romero 25 Jul '13

25 Jul '13

I noted detail for dynamic_bitset<> is not using the far old ASM instruction BSF which could accelerate find_first() and find_next() methodsI checked asm generated with current table based implementation.On x64 and x86 BSF and BSR are available long time ago.Population count can be implemented with LZCNT for performance oriented ways to build.Core i7 with AVX2 enable new wide block bit manipulation but it needs to code with specific GNU g++ intrinsics and MSVC intrinsics. Someone agree? Jairo.

2 1

semi lock-free Signals/Slots
by Andrew Ho 24 Jul '13

24 Jul '13

Hi, I've been doing some testing with implementing a semi lock-free Signals/Slots library. Basically: 1. emits are lock-free thanks to atomic shared_ptr's/other atomic operations. 2. Only a single writer is allowed at a time, uses a mutex for locking. The primary goal is to improve low and no slot-count signal emit performance. In tests, I have been able to get substantial performance boosts (~2 to 5 times) on low slot-count signals, approaching the same performance as signals2 in low-contention (basically, single thread testing). I haven't tested high emit contention performance, though I suspect this library will excel quite well here because there is no locking on emit. The test implementation is still incomplete, and notably uses many C++11 features, though I don't think any of features I'm using can't be ported one way or another for C++03 support. Even if the library isn't used in full, some of the ideas might be implemented into the existing Signals2 library. link: https://github.com/helloworld922/signals3

2 2

Announcing boost dependency analyzer
by Jens Weller 24 Jul '13

24 Jul '13

Hello to the boost community, I'd like to announce the release of a small tool, that allows you analyze the dependencies in boost. It is based on bcp, requirement is that you have bcp build and well a version of boost to analyze installed. Simply select the boost directory (the tool also might find BOOST_ROOT) and the location of bcp, and the tool will start. This will take a little time, depending on your machine, on my multicore intel ist 90 seconds - 2 minute. The tool will store this information into a database, so that with the next start, this will be a lot shorter. The tool allows to analyze the dependcies of a single boost library, but also of all of boost. Its build with Qt for the UI and processing part, and uses boost graph for the layout. Full information + download you'll find at my blogpost: http://www.meetingcpp.com/index.php/br/items/boost-dependency-analyzer.html Current Issues: What libraries might be missing? I'm reading the libs from maintainers.txt, which isn't all the boost libs. For example, lexical_cast is missing, and function_types is twice in there. (C&P error or missing library?) So far Windows is supported, linux support planned and improving, currently ownly the (beta) binaries for linux available. kind regards, Jens Weller

5 9

Re: [boost] [build][msvc] create PDBs
by Ahmed Charles 24 Jul '13

24 Jul '13

The size difference is LTCG, not debug info. ________________________________ From: Daniela Engert Sent: 7/23/2013 9:40 AM To: boost(a)lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [build][msvc] create PDBs Am 23.07.2013 17:47, schrieb Andrey Semashev: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Daniela Engert <dani(a)ngrt.de> wrote: >> >> libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 188.671.120 >> libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 132.616.192 >> libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 220.099.308 >> libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 132.837.376 >> libboost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 53.565.446 >> libboost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 7.942.144 >> libboost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 32.516.250 >> libboost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 8.114.176 >> > > It looks like static libs contain debug info anyway as they are always > larger than the generated pdb. In many cases, your observed size relationship is true, but not in all of them. E.g.: libboost_exception-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 53.642 libboost_exception-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 102.400 libboost_exception-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 11.440 libboost_exception-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 102.400 To exhibit the size advantage of PDBs over 'old-style' debug info embedded into static libs, I've rebuilt Boost.Log with link=static debug-store=object. This is the result: libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 343.234.460 libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 374.488.888 libboost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 79.564.296 libboost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 59.539.544 Ciao Dani _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 1

clang AST based static analysers - Booster's experience
by Niall Douglas 23 Jul '13

23 Jul '13

Dear Boost Devs, I was wondering what the experience of the list is with clang AST based static analysers? They need not be clang AST based of course, so long as they are based on the frontend of a real compiler rather than trying their own implementation based on regex or something even worse. For this list's information, here are the three clang AST based static analysers I know of: 1. Clang's static analyser http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/ 2. OCLint http://oclint.org/ 3. The commercial tool CppDepend can now use a clang AST (http://blog.llvm.org/2013/04/static-analysis-tools-using-clang-in.html) Some quick notes of mine which may be of dubious accuracy: Clang's static analyser is the more mature tool, but according to http://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ClangStaticAnalyzer which was updated Mar 2013 it feels its default bundled C++ tests is lacking. The real strength in the clang static analyser is for writing your own tests (http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/checker_dev_manual.html) which enforce specific coding patterns or constraints (usually on others, and usually pre-commit with commit rejection if fail). OCLint is a newer tool, but appears to have fuller support for C++ (http://docs.oclint.org/en/dev/rules/index.html) though many of those rules appear to check C syntax only (which also covers Objective C). Similar to clang's static analyser, new custom rules are easy to write (http://docs.oclint.org/en/dev/internals/rules.html) This project, at least from the outside, seems to have more legs than clang's static analyser. CppDepend I have no experience of, but there is a reasonably positive review at http://www.asawicki.info/news_1511_cppdepend.html. One of the CppDepend developers talks about how they added clang's AST at http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/475254/ClangplusRocks. Niall --- Opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of BlackBerry Inc.

1 0

[build][msvc] create PDBs
by Daniela Engert 23 Jul '13

23 Jul '13

Hi list! For various reasons I always preferred to have debug info separate from the binaries. Unfortunately, emitting debug info to PDBs doesn't work so well, in particular when it comes to static libs and precompiled headers. Because of that I tried to rectify this and created a patch against msvc.jam. (see ticket #8889 https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/8889) This (and a tiny script to collect all generated PDBs into the library directory) got me there: boost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.dll 1.158.656 boost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 24.244 boost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 123.055.104 boost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.dll 3.206.144 boost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 24.408 boost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 219.220.992 boost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.dll 486.400 boost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 241.174 boost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 10.857.472 boost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.dll 1.071.616 boost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 242.278 boost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 18.918.400 libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 188.671.120 libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 132.616.192 libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 220.099.308 libboost_log_setup-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 132.837.376 libboost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.lib 53.565.446 libboost_log-vc120-mt-1_54.pdb 7.942.144 libboost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.lib 32.516.250 libboost_log-vc120-mt-gd-1_54.pdb 8.114.176 Boost.Log was chosen for exhibition only. All files were built with debug-symbols=on debug-store=database. Link-time code generation was enabled for all release builds, too. May be, someone finds this helpful. Ciao Dani

2 2

[format] doc fix
by Tim Blechmann 23 Jul '13

23 Jul '13

not sure, how well-maintained boost.format is these days ... any objection if i commit this documentation fix? cheers, tim

1 0

Fwd: Re: Announcing boost dependency analyzer
by Stephen Kelly 23 Jul '13

23 Jul '13

Jens Weller wrote: >> Unfortunately the Boost dependency graph is as huge a hairball as I was >> afraid :-/ > > Hi, thanks for the feedback. Yes, dependency graph for boost is quite > large... I think with boost in git and modules available, this is going to > improve. That won't happen automatically. The git conversion is separate to reorganizing to resolve the solvable interdepency issues: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.ryppl.devel/201/focus=… The salient point is: > By modularizing and making the interdependencies explicit, we hope to > encourage developers to refactor. But we can only solve one problem at a > time. So, if you want to work on resolving interdependencies, don't wait for the git conversion to be done, because it won't help, and do pick up your editor and dig, because only that will help. Thanks, Steve.

1 0

Regression tests report page cycling slow
by Joaquin M Lopez Munoz 23 Jul '13

23 Jul '13

Hi, the page http://www.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/summary.html seems to update very unfrequently, every two days or longer. Can something be done to speed this up? Thank you in advance, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica Digital

2 1