- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[release] Boost 1.72.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 2
by Marshall Clow 21 Nov '19

21 Nov '19

Boost release 1.72.0 beta 1 rc2 is now available at: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.72.0.beta.1.rc2/source/> The release notes are not yet available. The updated documentation is not yet available. [ They will be available in a day or two. ] The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 5a6b5cbd27b8ca0c7741b715e022a3bf05aecbb1e73dc72dd82eef9622374bd5 ./boost_1_72_0_b1_rc2.7z 6c85a7aed198757f5e4be66a971ae90a25c4ce32703fecfb5bb19019bd80947c ./boost_1_72_0_b1_rc2.tar.bz2 be4a3fdaa84d5a8b25863651043308e02645f3fbf772b7623ee6462fb1dbad09 ./boost_1_72_0_b1_rc2.tar.gz 95181a5f3de0078b8fc031f63a4dc8be4d70b7d3d5cde3b266d2cd98bd4b61b0 ./boost_1_72_0_b1_rc2.zip Changes since RC1: * Fix Boost.IOStreams to allow compilation on Mac OS w/LZMA support. Please download the beta release candidate, give it a try, and report any problems you encounter. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

2 2

[release] Boost 1.72.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 1
by Michael Caisse 18 Nov '19

18 Nov '19

Boost release 1.72.0 beta 1 rc1 is now available at: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.72.0.beta.1.rc1/source/> The release notes are not yet available. The updated documentation is not yet available. [ They will be available in a day or two. ] The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 3dd80fc3979c312bf892398c35778d821f6744a7fbf76c8248c85b4f3702e4d4 boost_1_72_0_b1_rc1.7z 676e476a2a1246c7c5e8f40230fa70469f29dfe8aaa5bce0a85f94692e605c68 boost_1_72_0_b1_rc1.tar.bz2 e62e5fdffe0772309c77fc9463a95350ebcabb2ce03f2c6ee177123016756044 boost_1_72_0_b1_rc1.tar.gz e3199f3f5046541570fffacd804d736e1999cfac05df6cc054ec97c8098d000d boost_1_72_0_b1_rc1.zip Please download the beta release candidate, give it a try, and report any problems you encounter. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

4 8

回复：Re: [release] Boost 1.72.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 1
by ckgppl_yan＠sina.cn 18 Nov '19

18 Nov '19

I can compile this release in my macOS catalina, 10.15.1. I don't have lama installed in my OS, so I didn't have the issue below.only some warnings out. Thanks Liang----- 原始邮件 ----- 发件人：Marshall Clow via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> 收件人：turkanis(a)coderage.com, Michael Caisse <mcaisse-lists(a)ciere.com> 抄送人：Marshall Clow <mclow.lists(a)gmail.com>, "boost(a)lists.boost.org List" <boost(a)lists.boost.org> 主题：Re: [boost] [release] Boost 1.72.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 1 日期：2019年11月19日 04点38分 This appears to be https://github.com/boostorg/iostreams/issues/102, and https://github.com/boostorg/iostreams/pull/103 is a suggested fix. -- Marshall On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 11:56 AM Marshall Clow <mclow.lists(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On my Mac, I the version of LZMA that I have installed (via homebrew) does > not have the multi-tasking calls (_lzma_cputhreads and > _lzma_stream_encoder_mt). > It identifies itself: > > $ cat junk.cpp > #include <iostream> > #include "lzma.h" > > int main() { > std::cout << LZMA_VERSION << std::endl; > } > > $ clang++ junk.cpp && ./a.out > 50020042 > $ > > Changing libs/iostreams/src/lzma.cpp thus solves enables things to build: > > #ifndef BOOST_IOSTREAMS_LZMA_NO_MULTITHREADED > - #if LZMA_VERSION < 50020002 > + #if LZMA_VERSION <= 50020042 > #define BOOST_IOSTREAMS_LZMA_NO_MULTITHREADED > #endif > #endif > > -- Marshall > _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

Required C++ version in meta/libraries.json
by Mateusz Loskot 18 Nov '19

18 Nov '19

Hi, How can I specify required version of the standard in the library meta info? Where is documentation of libraries.json schema? I've learned that "std":"C++17", for example, in Boost.Any states which standard adopted the library. That is not what I'm after. -- Mateusz Loskot, mateusz(a)loskot.net (Sent from mobile, may suffer from top-posting)

1 1

Jason is getting MARRIED!
by Vinnie Falco 18 Nov '19

18 Nov '19

My JSON library is going to propose to Boost soon, is there anyone who might be willing and able to function in the role of review manager? Thanks!

3 4

pulling the plug on Boost Library Incubator
by Robert Ramey 17 Nov '19

17 Nov '19

I've been maintaining the Boost Library Incubator (www.blincubator.com) for some years now. Maintaining is sort of mis-nomer since it not required any change for years now. I never, ever touch it. I was painful to get to that point though. My motivation is the continuing evolution of github which I believe has come to embody almost of the goals I've had for the inclubator. I would like a couple of tweaks to git hub - or maybe just some changes in our usage of it. For example I'd like to see us proliferate the tags #Boost and #ProposedForBoost to help us search stuff but basically I believe that it has made boost library incubator obsolete. So I'm inclined to terminate it when the domain comes up for renewal the next time. Currently it has about 200 page views / day. I don't really know how much of that a bots/rss feeds and the like. I do you a service which detects and filters out almost all the obvious bogus hits, but still one never knows. BTW - the tipping point for me is the addition of "sponsership" to github. This looks to be the realization of an idea which I've promoted for many years in one for or another. I would like to successful open source project developers and maintainers get rewarded financially rewarded for their efforts and I see that git hub promoters seem to share this view - and they're in a position to move it toward reality. When I can't sleep at night, I imagine that microsoft looked at the incubator and copied features from it into the git hub. Feels like I'm dreaming so I don't feel like I'm awake anymore. Robert Ramey

1 0

Re: [boost] Jason is getting MARRIED!
by Peter Dimov 17 Nov '19

17 Nov '19

> or even `{ "size": 3, "data": [ 1, 2 ] }`. Er, "size": 2 obviously. :-)

1 0

Fwd: Markdown to Quickbook
by Mateusz Loskot 15 Nov '19

15 Nov '19

As boost-docs may not be as popular among subscribers as the development list, I'm bumping my chances for solution... ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Mateusz Loskot <mateusz(a)loskot.net> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 21:25 Subject: Markdown to Quickbook To: <boost-docs(a)lists.boost.org> Hi, Is there an established known method for converting a Markdown document to Quickbook dokument? Best regards, Mateusz Loskot, mateusz(a)loskot.net (Sent from mobile, may suffer from top-posting) -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

3 3

Removing old branches
by Edward Diener 15 Nov '19

15 Nov '19

I received an issue about Boost PP having lots of old branches which the issuer would like removed. I notice most other Boost libraries also have lots of old branches. Is there any policy about removing these old branches from a Boost library repository ? Many of these old branches are svn-branches, but most of them do not have any value any more and, of course, do not affect the current 'develop' or 'master' branch.

5 7

[preprocessor] Testing C++ standard macro examples
by Edward Diener 14 Nov '19

14 Nov '19

I have added to the 'develop' branch of Boost PP an 'explicit' test with the alias of 'test_iso' in the 'test' subdirectory. This test, depending on the compiler toolset and C++ standard setting used, will test a compiler's ability to expand correctly the macros listed in a C++ standard document's "Macro Replacement" section for C++ standards 2003, 2001, 2014, 2017, and 2020 ( N4835 ). The test uses the __cplusplus setting and the Boost PP BOOST_PP_VARIADICS setting to determine which C++ standard's set of macros to test. This is because the __cplusplus setting alone is misleading for a number of compilers, most notably vc++ and compilers who mimic vc++, who do not set the correct __cplusplus setting for the C++ standard level being used. There are really only three sets of macros from the C++ standard documents which can potentially be tested, despite five different standards being considered. This is because the set of macros to be tested for C++11, C++14, and C++17 are exactly the same. Some compilers do allow C++20 support but do not implement the full __VA_OPT__ support yet, so these compilers will fail the C++20 macro tests with compiler errors. Among these are gcc and vc++, who both document that they do not yet support the stringizing operator with the __VA_OPT__ parameter. Clang also supports C++20 and will run the test and succeed in that mode. You can of course test any compiler at any C++ level and view the results. These tests, unlike Boost PP, do not have any workarounds for any compilers. So the tests form a really good basis for reporting macro expansion preprocessor bugs to various compiler implementations. In the 'test' subdirectory of Boost PP you should be able to run: b2 toolset=atoolset cxxstd=astandard( optional ) test_iso to get the results for any compiler. Any failed results will show the test output, where the original expression, the expanded expression, and for individual failed tests the expected expanded expression will be shown. The actual macros being used are in the appropriate C++ Standard documents or can be seen in the test program which is called cpp_standard.cpp in the same 'test' subdirectory. After the upcoming release I will push this to the 'master' branch. Please note that the test is an 'explicit' test so it is not normally run when you just run the tests for Boost PP.

1 0