- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

boost random question
by Neal D. Becker 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

For the new random number generators, if I want to share a single underlying uniform random generator, I need to do like so: typedef boost::mt19937 rng_t; rng_t rng; boost::variate_generator<rng_t&, boost::normal_distribution<> > tn (rng, boost::normal_distribution<> (0, sqrt (var))); boost::variate_generator<rng_t&, boost::pnseq_generator<1> > pn (rng, boost::pnseq_generator<1>()); That is, I need to say "rng_t&" for the 1st template param rather than "rng_t". Is this correct? The old rng lib passed the engine by ref in the constructor, but the new one doesn't. Correct?

2 1

RE: RE: Boost Test Framework - log and report files
by "Kåsa, Daniel Roy" 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

First of all thank you Gennadiy! I appreciate the speedy response and help. > > 1. I need to have the test log and report written to two > > separate files in xml format. (It would be nice to have a DTD > > of both xml formats) > > Ok. Will do. Will the schema work? Yes it would. You write 'the' schema does it exist? If so where? I am concerned with this because I am trying to provide a well formed set of html reports based upon our regression tests. To do this I need the complete specification of the available tags and their respective attributes. > > I did this by instructing the framework > > with the command line argument: --output_format=XML. Now that > > I had both the log and result report in XML format I needed > > to create two file streams to redirect the output of them to > > each their own file. This was easy to achieve with the log > > using the set_log_stream method, but not so trivial with the > > result report. Calling the singleton of the result report > > before the test framework has initialized my code first calls > > a null pointer crashing the test. How should this be done? > > The documentation states that the interface of the > > unit_test_result does not need to be used directly, but in my > > case where I want a file stream instead of the std::err I > > need to have access to the singleton and preferable in the > > same place I set up the rest of my test suites. > > First of all why would you need to do anything? By default log goes to > std::out and report goes to std::err. Also as you mentioned log output > stream could be reset using set_log_stream method. Very true, I was so busy trying to redirect the output that I didn't even notice this fact (Is this stated in the documentation?) > This should be enough for your purposes As for report output stream it's > actually unit_test_main who is responsible for setting specific stream and > it not configurable at the moment. > > > 2. To achieve pt 1 I needed to edit unit_test_framework.hpp > > (I think). I wanted to add support for my own command line > > argument which would instruct the framework of the two files > > I would like to create. So I thought it would be convenient > > to use the reteive_framework_parameter method to retrieve my > > custom command argument. Sadly enough I noticed that the > > method doesn't return the value assigned to my argument > > unless it is recognized. Is this fair? > > Yes. This is true. reteive_framework_parameter only strips parameters from > command line that it knows about. The > rest you are getting in init function. You could use any method to > retrieve the value needed for you. I will have to, but I it would be convenient to have this as an available service. If it is ever meant that the framework could be customized I would expect support methods of this sort. > Actually CLA support will be the first thing I am going to rework > completely for next release. I think it should address your concern > either. See mailing list for updates. Nice to hear. :) > > Daniel R. Kåsa > > > Gennadiy.

1 0

libs/iterator/doc/iterator_facade.html typo?
by Angus Leeming 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

libs/iterator/doc/iterator_facade.html#tutorial-example In the section "Template Arguments for iterator_facade" is the subsection "CategoryOrTraversal". I suspect that should be "CategoryOfTraversal" (s/Or/Of/). The iterator_adapter docs spell it "CategoryOrTraversal" too. Regards, Angus

3 13

RE: [boost] Re: 1.31.0 regressions
by Rozental, Gennadiy 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

> > Say a library now covers 100 test cases spread out among five test > > programs. I'd like to see those five programs refactored into one > > program, still covering the 100 test cases. Or even adding more test > > cases. A single program would cut the overhead, including the human > > overhead. Sorry I missed the beginning of the thread: how would having one program help? > There are at least three drawbacks to this approach: > > 1. "something is wrong" is all the information you get from > a failing test. Esp. you'll likely see only one of several > problems related to a failing test program. The next > problem will only become visible after the first problem > has been fixed. This is not necessarily true. If one uses Boost Unit test framework you most probably get all the errors in one shot. > 2. Some tests are known to fail for certain compilers. > If those tests are joined with other tests then we'll > lose information about these other tests. If it runtime errors you could rely on "expected errors" feature. You are right for compile time errors, though one could try to ifdef part of test program. Gennadiy.

3 3

[boostbook] setup documentation minor nit:
by Ronald Garcia 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

Howdy, In the documentation for setting up boostbook located at: http://www.boost.org/regression-logs/cs-win32_metacomm/doc/html/boostbook.g… The path "tools/build/new" is mentioned as the location of user-config.jam. It appears that the path has since changed to "tools/build/v2". cheers, ron

2 1

1.31.1 critical update patch?
by David Abrahams 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

We need to fix the regressions in 1.31.0 right away. Since I don't have time to manage a release, and nobody else has volunteered to do it, I'd like to suggest that we post a 1.31.1 "critical update" patch for 1.31.0 on the website. This would save us from having to deal with a site update or making new release archives until someone can really devote the attention a full release deserves. Thoughts? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com

4 3

broken image on the web pages?
by Ronald Garcia 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

Howdy, If I go to http://www.boost.org/ and select "Nightly CVS" Under "Documentation", I find a broken image in the top left corner where I would expect to see the Boost logo. I'm presuming that this page is autogenerated from boostbook? Cheers, ron

1 0

Constructing boost::posix_time::ptime from "flat" time?
by charles.crain＠ni.com 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

I am having a hard time figuring out how to construct a ptime from a "flat" time (i.e., some number of time units since some epoch) other than a time_t. For instance, we have a lot of software here at work that represents time as a double-precision floating point number of seconds since 1/1/1904 00:00:00 GMT. As you can imagine, any sensible number is bigger than a 32-bit integer. I would like to be able to construct a ptime something like this: ptime p(date(1904, Jan, 1), microsec(boost::int64_t(float64_time * 1000000.0)); ...or even better... ptime p(date(1904, Jan, 1), float64_time); Problem is, it seems the constructors to most time_duration types use longs, even if they use int64's internally. I can't get the above example to work with any time past 12/31/1904 23:24:12, which just happens to be 0x80000000 microseconds past 1/1/1904. Another thing I would like to do is construct a ptime from a Win32 FILETIME, which is an int64 number of 100ns intervals since 1/1/1601. Something like this: ptime p(date(1601, Jan, 1), nanosec(100 * fileTime)); Is there a better way to do this? I am using MSVC 6.0 SP5 with Boost 1.31.0. -Charles

3 5

boost::function & gcc 2.96 problem
by Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve 13 Feb '04

13 Feb '04

Because of a problem in boost/function/function_template.hpp Boost.Python in the current CVS HEAD does not compile with gcc 2.96 under RedHat 7.3. Attached is a suggested workaround (tested with gcc 2.96 and EDG 245). Ralf Index: function_base.hpp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/boost/function/function_base.hpp,v retrieving revision 1.72 diff -u -r1.72 function_base.hpp --- function_base.hpp 11 Feb 2004 18:16:55 -0000 1.72 +++ function_base.hpp 12 Feb 2004 22:01:42 -0000 @@ -188,8 +188,10 @@ // The trivial manager does nothing but return the same pointer (if we // are cloning) or return the null pointer (if we are deleting). template<typename F> - inline any_pointer - trivial_manager(any_pointer f, functor_manager_operation_type op) + struct trivial_manager + { + static inline any_pointer + get(any_pointer f, functor_manager_operation_type op) { switch (op) { case clone_functor_tag: return f; @@ -209,6 +211,7 @@ // Clears up a warning with GCC 3.2.3 return make_any_pointer(reinterpret_cast<void*>(0)); } + }; /** * The functor_manager class contains a static function "manage" which Index: function_template.hpp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/boost/function/function_template.hpp,v retrieving revision 1.70 diff -u -r1.70 function_template.hpp --- function_template.hpp 24 Jan 2004 23:31:40 -0000 1.70 +++ function_template.hpp 12 Feb 2004 22:01:42 -0000 @@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ invoker_type; invoker = &invoker_type::invoke; - this->manager = &detail::function::trivial_manager<FunctionObj>; + this->manager = &detail::function::trivial_manager<FunctionObj>::get; this->functor = this->manager( detail::function::make_any_pointer( @@ -529,7 +529,7 @@ >::type invoker_type; invoker = &invoker_type::invoke; - this->manager = &detail::function::trivial_manager<FunctionObj>; + this->manager = &detail::function::trivial_manager<FunctionObj>::get; this->functor = detail::function::make_any_pointer(this); } __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

4 6

Any news about the formal review process re-animation?
by JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z 12 Feb '04

12 Feb '04

Some weeks ago it was discussed in the mailing list how to boost the review process which seemingly had stuck for quite a while. Unfortunately the discussion seemed to fade away with no definitive conclusions. Could it be possible to know what the status of the review queue is? The review schedule page does not seem to have changed since the discussion took place. I'm interested myself because I applied for formal review some time ago. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

2 1