January 2017 - Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[asio] doc format changed?
by Vinnie Falco 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

Why did the formatting for Boost.Asio documentation change from 1.61 to 1.63? Compare: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_61_0/doc/html/boost_asio.html http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_63_0/doc/html/boost_asio.html This looks like it was unintended, and its screwing up search engines (try searching for "Boost Asio 1.63.0 Reference" -- Follow me on Github: https://github.com/vinniefalco

4 9

[Interprocess] move semantics for intrusive_ptr
by Mikolaj Krzewicki 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

Dear all, would it be possible to add the rvalue operators to interprocess::intrusive_ptr akin to what is already available in "regular" boost::intrusive_ptr: // Move support #if !defined( BOOST_NO_CXX11_RVALUE_REFERENCES ) intrusive_ptr(intrusive_ptr && rhs) BOOST_NOEXCEPT : px( rhs.px ) { rhs.px = 0; } intrusive_ptr & operator=(intrusive_ptr && rhs) BOOST_NOEXCEPT { this_type( static_cast< intrusive_ptr && >( rhs ) ).swap(*this); return *this; } #endif many thanks, Mikolaj

2 1

[outcome] "sea of noexcept, islands of throwing"
by Andrzej Krzemienski 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

Niall, I moved this to another thread, as I believe it is quite independent of the documentation review. I am trying to understand the concept of "sea of noexcept, islands of throwing", and its significance. First, is this programming technique the primary motivation for Boost.Outcome? In the docs, I only saw a small mention of it, but from your replies it looks like this is an important part of the library. But I might be wrong. This "sea and islands" are quite similar to what is described in P0364R0 ("Report on Exception Handling Lite (Disappointment) from SG14"). The authors argue that if the exception control flow is indicated explicitly, the compiler has a better chance of performing optimizations. I understand that your goal (with the Outcome library) is to offer something more modest, but implementable in C++. You are saying, that the C++ compiler can implement similar optimizations, provided that all the try-catch-throw flows are confined to one translation unit. Did I get it right? The authors of P0364R0 claim that in some business domains, like video games, if you encounter a failure to acquire resources, you might as well terminate the program. For this reason RAII is not really that important there: you want to shut down the app rather than clean up and continue. Is it also what you are saying? Do you also intend to support something like 'panic mode' in Rust? I do not know Rust, but I understand that this 'panic mode' is shut down the program but with resource cleanup. Sorry, my questions are quite random. But I am trying to understand the idea. Regards, &rzej;

3 7

Generating Boost documentation with pandoc
by Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

Has anyone tried to generate Boost-styled documentation using pandoc? I never fully liked PDF documentation because I never actually print documentation. However, a few weeks ago I got an ebook reader and I've been fascinated by the ePUB format. I'm using it to read even the IETF's RFCs and it's very pleasant. I'm using ePUB to read files even on my usual laptop. Anyway, I was wondering how nice would be to have an ePUB file containing the whole Boost documentation. pandoc has docbook support as one of its input formats and is capable of generating great ePUB output. -- Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira https://vinipsmaker.github.io/

7 27

[outcome] Added LEWG expected<T, E> implementation, what about the tutorial?
by Niall Douglas 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

Quite a bit of feedback from here, from SG14 and from Reddit expressed disappointment that Outcome doesn't implement the LEWG expected<T, E>. basic_monad makes implementing a fully compliant expected<T, E> just a few hours of work, so I went ahead and added one today and you can see its reference docs at https://ned14.github.io/boost.outcome/group__expected.html. These are the known deviations from the LEWG proposal: * P0323R1 doesn't yet specify what will be done if you try accessing an expected which is valueless due to exception. We throw a bad_expected_access<void> in this situation as that seemed sensible. If the LEWG proposal decides on something different, this implementation will change to track the LEWG proposal. * unexpected_type<E> is implemented as an expected<void, E> and it lets the basic_monad machinery do the implicit conversion to some expected<T, E>. * Types T and E cannot be constructible into one another. * expected<T, E> defaults E to error_code_extended. If you don't like this, predefine the BOOST_OUTCOME_EXPECTED_DEFAULT_ERROR_TYPE macro. * The ordering operators are not implemented due to https://akrzemi1.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/a-gotcha-with-optional/ So now you get in Outcome expected<T, E>; option<T>, result<T> and outcome<T>. And the Expected implementation ought to be drop in compatible with any future C++ 20 standard. How would people prefer the Outcome tutorial to now go? Should it mention expected<T, E> at all? Or should it get its own tutorial page (which will look very similar to the tutorial for result<T>). Which order should they be in? Is expected<T, E> easier than outcomes or the other way round? Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/

1 0

docs for hana broken on webpage (boost 1.63)
by Hans Dembinski 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

Hi, the current docs for Hana are still broken: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_63_0/libs/hana/doc/html/index.html yields "404 Not Found". Best regards, Hans

5 8

[function] Problem with simple pointer to function
by Fu ji 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

Hello all, I have a problem with boost::function, when I try to assign function to pointer I have a crash. It is simple void function(); boost::function <void (void)> m_Wakeup; and the code where crush occurs looks like: Wakeup = &function; Here is also the dump: Program terminated with signal 6, Aborted. *#0 0x03c4a092 in _dl_start () from /lib/ld-linux.so.2* *#0 0x03c4a092 in _dl_start () from /lib/ld-linux.so.2* *#1 0x03d0eca5 in raise () from /opt/vmware/cimpdk-6.0.0-2768847/debug/build-3825889/lib/libc.so.6* *#2 0x03d104e3 in abort () from /opt/vmware/cimpdk-6.0.0-2768847/debug/build-3825889/lib/libc.so.6* *#3 0x03ca2aec in handleSigSegv () from /opt/vmware/cimpdk-6.0.0-2768847/debug/build-3825889/usr/lib/libsfcBrokerCore.so.0* *#4 0x00310002 in ?? ()* *#5 0x025c060a in move_assign () at /workspace/raid0/src/boost/function/function_template.hpp:998* *#6 swap () at /workspace/raid0/src/boost/function/function_template.hpp:870* *#7 operator=<void (*)()> () at /workspace/raid0/src/boost/function/function_template.hpp:1126* *#8 create_interface () at /workspace/raid0/src/CppWrapper.cpp:298* Do anyone have a clue what was wrong ? Best regards

2 2

Interest in updated expression template library?
by Zach Laine 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

I'm trying to gauge interest in submitting a library to the review queue, It's an expression template library called Yap using C++14 and C++17 features, built on top of Hana. It does not work quite the same as Proto, though of course it covers the same problem domain. My goal for the library was to cover the Proto functionality (while allowing the user to write less code than she would have had to with Proto) plus more functionality made easier by the new language features. In the examples you will find nearly all of the Proto examples reproduced, each in a-bit-less to dramatically-less code. The only Proto examples that were left out were ones that are now trivial using Yap due to differences in design. Online docs: https://tzlaine.github.io/yap GiHub page: https://github.com/tzlaine/yap Zach

7 32

BGL Algo Contribution
by Robert R. McCune 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

Hello, I'd like to contribute to the Boost Graph Library I've written code for Lexicographic Breadth-First Search (LexBFS) How may I best contribute? Thanks, Ryan

2 1

Re: [boost] Boost 1.64 release date
by Rene Rivera 16 Jan '17

16 Jan '17

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Raffi Enficiaud < raffi.enficiaud(a)mines-paris.org> wrote: > Dear all, > > I would like to know in advance (approximately) the release date of 1.64. > > Would it be possible to date of the next release at each new release? > Release Dates Spring release on the second Wednesday of April. Summer release on the second Wednesday of August. Fall/Winter release on the second Wednesday of December. <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/ReleaseSchedule> -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail

5 8