March 2019 - Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

Re: [boost] [review][variant2] Variant2 Review Starts April 1
by dariomt＠gmail.com 26 Mar '19

26 Mar '19

> > dariomt--- wrote: > > > The class boost::variant2::variant<T...> is an almost conforming > > > implementation of std::variant with the following differences: > > > > > > I see the useful comparison to std::variant in the doc, however I'm > using > > boost::variant extensively in my code. > > > > It would be very useful to have also a short comparison to > boost::variant > > in the doc, as I would expect many more current users of the venerable > > boost::variant than of its much younger cousin std::variant. > > The main difference is that Variant2 is a pin-compatible replacement for > std::variant, whereas Boost.Variant isn't (at least for now). So it's > easier > to switch from std::variant to Variant2 and back (depending f.ex. on > whether > std::variant is available.) > > The second most important difference would probably be the fact that > Boost.Variant may do heap allocations. > This is useful info, thanks! I understand that the main objective is to offer a "better" std::variant, but as a user of Boost.Variant wondering "Should I consider migrating to Boost.Variant2?", I would expect a section in the doc addressing this question.

1 0

Which forum to handle issues/questions regarding libraries
by Robert Ramey 25 Mar '19

25 Mar '19

I've been studying the boost multiprecision library and I have a few questions relating to various aspects of said library. These questions are quite specific to that library and I'm not sure that they are of wider interest other than to a couple people. So I'm wondering if it would be better to post these as library issues on github or on this list or both. It used to be simple but now we have at least three places to discuss these things: slack, here and github issues for the library in question. Also sometimes some PRs can highlight differences which can get ironed out in the PR comments. Do we have a consensus as to the preferred way to select the correct forum? Robert Ramey

5 4

Looking for a Mentor: GSoC 19: Boost.uBLAS: Linear and Multilinear...: Project 1 and 2
by forcha glen 24 Mar '19

24 Mar '19

Hello, I am interested in any of these two projects. I do not yet have a mentor. I need mentor. Regards, Glen

2 1

Re: [boost] Master branch open for merging
by Nikita Kniazev 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

I would like to merge Spirit to master. The develop contains bunch of minor changes, but I important ones are: Endian namespace pollution and macros conflict fixes: https://github.com/boostorg/spirit/commit/6c258d506c2bbadccdb9f25e481984aca… https://github.com/boostorg/spirit/commit/74c0ec310a2345cb95ffb947327f69007… https://github.com/boostorg/spirit/commit/9d48b5a23197bbbcc4a3a8990c164b1cf… GCC 6/7 regression avoidance: https://github.com/boostorg/spirit/commit/8bd9b6ece40f9324a902bb0f726e785ff… The regression matrix is green for two weeks.

2 1

[release] Boost 1.70.0 Beta 1 is now available
by Marshall Clow 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

[ resending with a non-empty subject line ] Boost release 1.70.0 beta 1 is now available at: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.70.0.beta1/source/> The SHA256 checksums are as follows: dbf89645e509acb2e53eac3c633834f1dec80bd8622e6e652a9741dcf0807f17 ./boost_1_70_0_b1.7z 957b984b58656a3ec00661ecad7ef82e3a094bad36e37b9e6624843237854679 ./boost_1_70_0_b1.tar.bz2 76d149c1fb9e8a5ceb3bc1e5587edc40fa79a43e8b990d877c2210f0382b9421 ./boost_1_70_0_b1.tar.gz 71e990b2c26880521fd98459b184ee172ce1c46dcf554b6eaab7776b8b6369a6 ./boost_1_70_0_b1.zip For details of what's in the release, see < https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_70_0.html>. Please download the beta, give it a try, and report any problems you encounter. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

6 14

[Process] Proposed solution for posix pipes staying open
by Bills, Jason M 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

Hello, I'm new to Boost and looking for some help on the right process to propose patches. I'm running in an embedded Linux environment (OpenBMC) using Boost 1.69.0 and just switched a couple of std::system() calls to boost::process::system() calls. After making this change, I noticed that each time my process executed the bp::system() call, I would get an extra pipe fd in my /proc/<pid>/fd list. I did some debugging and have found a possible solution for this issue in the Boost.Process posix headers that I would like to propose. What is the right forum or process to post my patch (post it here, github pull request, etc.)? Thanks! -Jason

2 2

questions about boost multiprecision
by Robert Ramey 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

I'm looking more carefully at Boost Multiprecision than I have in the past and have a couple of questions: It's not clear to me how errors are handled. For example, what happens in a divide by zero? Or what happens when a result overflows. I'm aware that this will likely vary depending on whether the arguments are arbitrary precision made a runtime or a precision fixed at compile time. In any case, looking through the manual I can't find this information. Of course this package is so ambitious, that it's possible that I've missed it but in that case a pointer would be appreciated. Spending some time on this makes me appreciate what an incredibly ambitious accomplishment this is. It's really unbelievable. I would be curious how frequently various parts of the package are used. Robert Ramey

4 4

usage of auto in tutorials
by Stephan Menzel 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

Hello all, I was eagerly awaiting the release of the 1.70 beta, especially for outcome, which I have much use for, having lots of async functionality. While looking at the tutorial here that https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_70_0_beta1/libs/outcome/doc/html/index.html I notice that auto is used instead of the types. Is there a background to this? I question if this is such a good thing in tutorials. The first thing I like to know about a new lib is the types and classes it offers and auto obfuscates this. Is there any consensus in the boost community as to how and if tutorials and docs should use auto? I have concerns about this and feel it doesn't increase the otherwise great quality of documentation and tutorials for new libs. Cheers, Stephan

10 17

[test] unit test command-line handling
by Stefan Seefeld 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

Hello, this is a question concerning the Boost.Test framework. I'd like to pass command-line arguments to my tests, and I'm unsure of how to proceed. I have found https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_68_0/libs/test/doc/html/boost_test/adv_sce…, which shows how to access the command-line programmatically, but that's declared obsolete, and it's also lacking some important info, such as how I should handle the argv vector. Are there any examples that demonstrate this use case ? Specifically: * What (non-deprecated) API can I use to access command-line arguments during test initialization ? * How does my own handling of command-line arguments interact with Boost.Test's own command-line argument handling ? Thanks, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

3 8

[move] Bug causing issue #81 in Interprocess
by Ion Gaztañaga 21 Mar '19

21 Mar '19

Hi, Looks like a Boost.Move bug that is causing problems in Interprocess and potentially in other libraries like Container. The bug is present in the soon to be released Boost 1.70. The bug was reported by Nikita Kniazev for Interprocess: https://github.com/boostorg/interprocess/issues/81 I've committed a simple fix in the develop branch: https://github.com/boostorg/move/commit/756c964798ff1110406fab541b85267aefb… I hope the regression can cycle soon and release managers can approve the patch for Boost 1.70. Best, Ion

1 0