- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[GSoC 14] Request community to rank proposals
by Niall Douglas 24 Mar '14

24 Mar '14

Dear Boost Community, The Google Summer of Code 2014 proposals for Boost are in, and we would deeply appreciate the community's help in ranking the proposals according to merit before the 1st of April. To vote, the process is easy: 1. Go to this page https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2014 and click the "Log in" button under Mentors and Administrators. 2. Now click "Create Profile" on the same page. Note that even if you registered last year, you must register again in 2014. Fill in the form. Note that after submitting it drops you at "Edit Profile", which is confusing. 3. Click "My Dashboard", then "Connect with organisations". 4. Choose "Boost C++ Libraries". 5. In the message box, write this: "I am a member of the Boost community and the email(s) I normally post to boost mailing lists with is <email>" filling in the email address(es) you normally use to post to boost mailing lists. This lets us verify that you are indeed a long standing member of the Boost community. 6. Once we approve your request, you will get an email with the subject "Welcome as organisation member". You can now return to the Dashboard on the GSoC website where there will be a new item "Proposals". 7. Work your way through as many of the 42 proposals as you can. You can score them using the stars at the bottom of each proposal page, taking care to read any comments by the mentors and students if present. PLEASE try to rank some of the lowest scored proposals, every year we get a lot of people who only rank the top five and don't bother with the rest. Try to score on the basis of (i) proposal quality and your best estimate of the student's capability (ii) if the student came early to the mailing lists to ask for help writing the proposal (the mentors who helped them with their proposals have usually indicated this in the private comments) (iii) usefulness/appropriateness of the feature or work being proposed. Remember a good GSoC is more about getting promising new engineers into Boost and C++ than necessarily getting code to pass Boost peer review in a single summer. 8. Optional: If a proposal looks especially great to you and you feel able to mentor a student this year, please slide the "wish to mentor" button. Just because a proposal already has willing mentors does NOT mean you should not add yourself - we have at least two mentors with many attached very highly ranked proposals and we really don't want to have to reject an outstanding proposal just because we can't find the mentors for it as no mentor can realistically mentor more than two projects simultaneously. As you know, Google Summer of Code is usually worth $35,000 - $50,000 to Boost each year, and a successful GSoC raises our visibility and reputation in the wider open source community. Our thanks to you in advance for taking the time to vote. Niall Douglas Boris Schäling --- Boost C++ Libraries Google Summer of Code 2014 admin https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/SoC2014

1 0

[build][testing] Auto-generated tests not present in reports
by Andrey Semashev 24 Mar '14

24 Mar '14

Hi, Recently I added auto-generation of compile tests which basically check that every Boost.Log public header is self-contained (i.e. can be included on its own, does not have any missing includes etc.) This is done in the test/Jamfile.v2 as follows: rule test_all { local all_rules = ; local file ; local headers_path = [ path.make $(BOOST_ROOT)/libs/log/include/boost/log ] ; for file in [ path.glob-tree $(headers_path) : *.hpp ] { local rel_file = [ path.relative-to $(headers_path) $(file) ] ; if ! [ MATCH "detail/(.*)" : $(rel_file) ] { #ECHO $(rel_file) ; all_rules += [ compile compile/self_contained_header.cpp : <define>"BOOST_LOG_TEST_HEADER=$(rel_file)" : self_contained_header/$(rel_file) ] ; } } ... other test targets are also generated here return $(all_rules) ; } This rule also generates targets for other tests, including compile tests. It works locally, I can see the generated tests for all headers being compiled. However, I made this change quite some time ago but still I don't see these tests in the test reports table. I can see other tests which are generated by the same test_all rule, so it works. What could be the problem? Any ideas? Thanks.

2 3

[Boost][Range] Non-mutating algorithm on non const qualified range
by Albert Yiamakis 24 Mar '14

24 Mar '14

Hello, In the users mailing list I have remarked that this piece of code: https://gist.github.com/Kojirion/9714131 will fail to compile, without providing 'mutable' iterators. I have since found out it will also compile by simply const qualifying the dummy object. (ie const Dummy dummy;) The reason is that without it this: is_const<Dummy> gets evaluated to false, resulting in boost::mpl::eval_if_c<false, boost::range_const_iterator<Dummy>, boost::range_mutable_iterator<Dummy> > Surely this is not intended behavior and it should be possible to use a range that has only const iterators in a non-mutating algorithm without const qualifying it? Albert

2 1

[GSoC 2014] Boost.Binaries Proposal (was " Boost.Binaries")
by Antony Polukhin 23 Mar '14

23 Mar '14

2014-03-21 16:31 GMT+04:00 Flavius Condrea <flavius.condrea(a)gmail.com>: > Hi everyone, > > I am very excited to have the opportunity to contribute to Boost C++ > Libraries. This is my proposal for GSoC 2014: > > https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B93eH9bi8ER0UHQtdDdFNFNoRGc/edit > I'd like to mention that Flavius Condrea has successfully done the test task for that that project and has shown a good knowledge of a problem domain. I've already recommended to make optional the "implement specific encrypt/decrypt algo" part of proposal, put more efforts into work with binaries and thinking of additional functionality. I have enough free time to mentor student during this GSOC. I wish to mentor this project if there'll be no objections. Any ideas,comments and additions to proposal are welcomed. -- Best regards, Antony Polukhin

3 2

[config] std::regex unusable on gcc?
by Andrey Semashev 23 Mar '14

23 Mar '14

Hi, I'm trying to use std::regex and it's failing with even the simplest patterns: #include <regex> int main(int, char* argv[]) { std::regex rex("\\d"); return std::regex_match("1", rex); } g++ -std=c++11 rex_test.cpp -o rex_test ./rex_test terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::regex_error' what(): regex_error Aborted (core dumped) GCC version: gcc version 4.8.1 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.8.1-10ubuntu9). GCC 4.7.3 exhibits the same behavior. Replacing "\\d" pattern with "[0-9]" results in the same failure. It works with Boost.Regex, Boost.Xpressive and with clang 3.4 & libc++. Am I doing something wrong? If my use of std::regex is correct then for me this basically means that std::regex is unusable. In this case, could we define BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_REGEX in Boost.Config for all versions of libstdc++?

3 3

[algorithm] How to contribute?
by Maciej Poleski 23 Mar '14

23 Mar '14

Hello I want to spend some time working on Boost. I saw this: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/SoC2014#Algorithms. I have some "algorithms and data structures" knowledge and I think about implementing something that would be valuable to Boost users and give me opportunity to dig a bit into Boost. I think about something simple to start with (like Radix sort). If everything go ok, I will try something more complex (parallel algorithms?). Let me know if this piece of work would make sense. Feel free to give another propositions if something different is more important. Maciej Poleski

2 1

[GSoC 2014] Boost.Fixed-Point Proposal
by Nikhar Agrawal 22 Mar '14

22 Mar '14

Hello everyone, Kindly find my proposal for Boost.Fixed-Point on the following link. http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/student/google/gsoc2014/… I have been in touch with the potential mentors of this project for quite some time now. The proposal is a result of my discussions with them. Do let me know what you think of it. Any feedback would be invaluable. If there are any visibility issues, kindly let me know. Thank you. Nikhar

6 10

Boost.Binaries
by Flavius Condrea 21 Mar '14

21 Mar '14

Hi everyone, I am very excited to have the opportunity to contribute to Boost C++ Libraries. This is my proposal for GSoC 2014: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B93eH9bi8ER0UHQtdDdFNFNoRGc/edit Best regards, Flavius Condrea

1 0

Teeks GCC test failures - multiprecision, spirit and others
by John Maddock 21 Mar '14

21 Mar '14

There are a lot of inscrutable failures from the Teeks machines running GCC on linux that I'm unable to reproduce (and aren't reproduced by other testers), for example: http://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/teeks99-03d… All the failures refer to is_convertible, and have an instantiation back trace that leads nowhere (a line that doesn't instantiate anything, and which refers to Boost.Range which multiprecision doesn't use). I see similar failures in the spirit tests as well. Is anyone able to reproduce these? Any ideas what may be going on? The failures are on the master branch as well if that helps. Many thanks, John.

5 5

[mpl] Merging 'develop' to 'master'
by Edward Diener 21 Mar '14

21 Mar '14

I would like to merge the mpl 'develop' changes to mpl 'master'. The develop changes have cycled long enough IMO for the merge to take place, without any problems showing up in the changes. There are two changes of my own and a number of Stephen Kelly eliminating support for very old compiler versions. The changes will clean up many obsolete workarounds for older versions of compilers that no one doing template metaprogramming should seriously use anymore. My own two changes fix some minor problems I ran into when testing clang with VC++ RTL on Windows. The changes make the MPL easier to understand. If there are no objections to the merge I will be glad to carefully do it myself, or Dave Abrahams/Alex Gurtovoy or others who have write access to MPL can do it. But I think it is important to get these changes into 'master', and tested in the 'master' regression tests, before the next Boost release.

3 6