- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[release] Boost 1.69.0
by Marshall Clow 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

Release 1.69.0 of the Boost C++ Libraries is now available. These open-source libraries work well with the C++ Standard Library, and are usable across a broad spectrum of applications. The Boost license encourages both commercial and non-commercial use. This release contains numerous enhancements and bug fixes for existing libraries. For details, including download links, see < http://www.boost.org/users/news/version_1.69.0> You can also download directly from: < https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/release/1.69.0/> SHA-256 sums: af05616f71006f97833e130aad886c96136457511ace4b5496d6566e69cbe0ca boost_1_69_0.7z 8f32d4617390d1c2d16f26a27ab60d97807b35440d45891fa340fc2648b04406 boost_1_69_0.tar.bz2 9a2c2819310839ea373f42d69e733c339b4e9a19deab6bfec448281554aa4dbb boost_1_69_0.tar.gz d074bcbcc0501c4917b965fc890e303ee70d8b01ff5712bae4a6c54f2b6b4e52 boost_1_69_0.zip To install this release on your system, see < http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/more/getting_started/index.html> Thanks to everyone who participated in this release. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team Vladimir Prus, Marshall Clow, Daniel James, Micheal Caisse

2 3

[release] 1.69.0 closed for release
by Marshall Clow 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

The master branch is now closed for all changes except by permission. The commit-bot isn't running on master, so the super project will need to be manually updated for any changes. If all goes well, the release candidate should be out later today. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

4 7

The Master branch is still closed; it will be opened tomorrow
by Marshall Clow 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

Thanks for your patience -- The boost release managers

1 0

Fwd: [run-clang-tidy] new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement
by Mateusz Loskot 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

(I'm forwarding here my clang-tidy problem I posted to cfe-user mailing list, since it touches Boost library, a highly templated library, and I'm hoping we have experienced clang-tidy users among Boost developers. Considering it a part of Boost library development, I hope it is not off-topic here.) ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Mateusz Loskot <mateusz(a)loskot.net> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 22:14 Subject: [run-clang-tidy] new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement To: <cfe-users(a)lists.llvm.org> Hi, I'm running clang-tidy 7.0 (also tried 5.0) to modernise some aspects of Boost.GIL (https://github.com/boostorg/gil) source code. I've noticed, clang-tidy 7.0 (also 5.0) does not apply fixes for some of modernize-use-* checks, especially modernize-use-using. I run it this way: ``` cd ${BOOST_ROOT}/libs/gil cmake -S . -B _build -DCMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS=ON .. run-clang-tidy.py -p=_build -header-filter='boost\/gil\/.*' -checks='-*,modernize-use-using' -fix ``` Then, I see huge number of "The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement." diagnostics. Below, I copied an extract that hopefully is useful to figure out what is happening and going wrong. Basically, there are two class templates and a bunch of tag types: 1. file_stream_device https://github.com/boostorg/gil/blob/e0288ece9ec50534e7d02166863d6799a5932e… 2. get_write_device with partial specialisations, `enable_if`-ed https://github.com/boostorg/gil/blob/e0288ece9ec50534e7d02166863d6799a5932e… The file_stream_device is specialised for a tag and final get_write_device specialisation is matched. And, clang-tidy tries to substitute this alias in get_write_device typedef detail::file_stream_device< FormatTag > type; not with using type = detail::file_stream_device< FormatTag > ; but with `using type` for each FormatTag-based specialisation ``` New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<bmp_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<bmp_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<jpeg_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<png_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<png_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<png_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<pnm_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<targa_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<targa_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<tiff_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. New replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<tiff_tag>" Existing replacement: /mnt/d/boost.wsl/libs/gil/include/boost/gil/io/get_write_device.hpp: 1885:+52:"using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag>" The new replacement overlaps with an existing replacement. ``` Why clang-tidy tries to re-fix the typedef with new replacement instead of keeping the existing one, the generic one? i.e. using type = detail::file_stream_device<FormatTag> I've tried to prepare a minimal example, but I couldn't reproduce this issue. I observed, that if I manually prepare compile_database.json with single .cpp file that just `#include <boost/gil/io/device.hpp>`, that is the header with definition of the base templates and no definitions with higher level specialisations for format tags are included, then clang-tidy applies the expected fixes without any warnings. Could anyone share any insights about this issue? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

1 1

How to install boost core
by Nipun Ramani 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

I am very new to boost and I have been wanting to build the library from scratch. I am using CMake with VS2017. I successfully created the project files of boost-core using CMake however I am unable to locate .lib file or .dll file after I run the build in VS2017.

2 1

[Website] Revised $Date$
by Olaf van der Spek 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

Hi, I don't think this is what it's supposed to be. > Revised $Date$ https://www.boost.org/development/index.html -- Olaf

1 1

Reminder: 1.69 closes for major changes Wednesday
by Marshall Clow 10 Dec '18

10 Dec '18

Upcoming dates: * 31-Oct: Boost 1.69.0 closed for major code changes * 7-Nov: Boost 1.69.0 closed for beta * 14-Nov: Boost 1.69.0 beta 1 * 5-Dec: Boost 1.69.0 closed for release * 12-Dec: Boost 1.69.0 release -- The Boost Release Team

4 3

Will the boost::asio::streambuf keep in sequency order when ostream write to boost::asio::streambuf multiple time?
by hh h 10 Dec '18

10 Dec '18

Hi, Are there any problems in following statements? The receiver works a few minutes, then got wrong number in header field. std::shared_ptr<boost::asio::streambuf> buffer = std::make_shared<boost::asio::streambuf>(); std::ostream os(buffer.get()); os.write((char *) &sendHeader, sizeof(sendHeader)); os.write((char *) sb.data(), sb.size()); boost::asio::async_write(socket_, *buffer.get(), .....); Thank you. - JHH

2 1

Is the async_read more reliable than async_read_some?
by hh h 09 Dec '18

09 Dec '18

Hi, I have been using asio::async_read with protobuf for some time, it is relative easy to use protobuf function SerializeToOstream to attach a packet header and send the packet header along with to protobuf message, with fixed packet header size and message size in the header, I was able to use async_read. But I have to change to use msgpack which I could not find a way like protobuf to attach a packet header to msgpack message. The only way I could do is to use async_read_some, but I am very concerning the remark in the async_read_some document. Appreciate your comments. "The read operation may not read all of the requested number of bytes. Consider using the async_read function if you need to ensure that the requested amount of data is read before the asynchronous operation completes." Thank you. - JH

3 9

Re: [boost] Can we skip the __boost_check_library__.test ?
by Rene Rivera 07 Dec '18

07 Dec '18

Rerouting to appropriate lists.. On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 6:00 PM Kuhl, Brian via Boost-build < boost-build(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > Hi Boost builders, > > We currently running the Boost test suite using ./b2 in the status > directory. > > We run nightly on several simulators and real boards using ARM, PowerPC, > Intel processors compiling Boost 1.68 with clang and GCC > > Our test results are being peppered with the occasional failure of > __boost_check_library__ > > I’m pretty sure we don’t care about the results of this test in the > context cross-compiling VxWorks? > Probably not. > What exactly is it testing for? > It checks various requirements and guidelines of the library structure. > And assuming it isn’t relevant, how do we “turn it off”? > Add the "--no-check-libs" per < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/blob/develop/status/Jamfile.v2#L18> (I believe running b2 --help in that dir would have shown you that info also). > The library Jam files don’t have an explicit reference to this that I can > find? > It's added here < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/blob/develop/status/Jamfile.v2#L119>. And it runs this script < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/blob/master/status/boost_check_library.py >. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net

2 1