- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

Re: [boost] boost.asem seeking endorsement
by Vinnie Falco 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 11:43 PM Klemens Morgenstern via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > I would like them to be in asio, > but I am not the asio author. > > Chris did not seem interested in the idea. Asio is already too large anyway and would be better as a few separate libraries Thanks

1 0

Re: [boost] boost.asem seeking endorsement
by Ruben Perez 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 at 06:05, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > Heya Boost Community, > > I am seeking endorsement for my boost.asem library. Endorsed. We need this library to do things like pipelining and request throttling in a sane way. I still think the best place for this would be Asio, but if there's not chance to get it in, Boost.Asem is good for me, too. I hereby volunteer as review manager in case you need it. Regards, Ruben.

1 0

Re: [boost] boost.asem seeking endorsement
by Marcelo Zimbres Silva 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

Hi, On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 at 08:43, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > I would like them to be in asio, > but I am not the asio author. > > Chris did not seem interested in the idea. Can you give more details, he did not express interest by being silent or has he raised design, useability etc. concerns? Or perhaps he is planning to implement them in asio in the future? Regards, Marcelo

1 0

Re: [boost] boost.asem seeking endorsement
by Andrey Semashev 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

On 3/7/23 08:04, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost wrote: > > I'm also not too happy with the name, but so far I only came up with an > acronym: Semaphore, Condition_variable, And Mutex. Suggestions are welcome. AsioSync?

1 0

Re: [boost] boost.asem seeking endorsement
by jepessen＠wteam.it 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

Hi. I've a simple question: those are primitives built around asio, and according to the documentation you say "This library is not meant as the default method of synchronization of asio-based apps, but to be used by library developers.", so there's a reason to create a different library instead that trying to merge them directly into boost::asio? Regards Daniele Lupo -----Original Message----- From: Boost <boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org> On Behalf Of Klemens Morgenstern via Boost Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 6:13 AM To: boost(a)lists.boost.org Cc: Klemens Morgenstern <klemensdavidmorgenstern(a)gmail.com> Subject: [boost] boost.asem seeking endorsement Heya Boost Community, I am seeking endorsement for my boost.asem library. It provides the following asio-based synchronization primitives: - barrier - condition_variable - mutex - semaphore Asio currently has timers & (experimental) channels that can help. However, I think there is a need for more purpose-made utilities to help more complex asio-based libraries (requests, redis, mysql et al.) Code: https://github.com/klemens-morgenstern/asem Docs: https://klemens.dev/asem/ I'm also not too happy with the name, but so far I only came up with an acronym: Semaphore, Condition_variable, And Mutex. Suggestions are welcome. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 1

boost.asem seeking endorsement
by Klemens Morgenstern 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

Heya Boost Community, I am seeking endorsement for my boost.asem library. It provides the following asio-based synchronization primitives: - barrier - condition_variable - mutex - semaphore Asio currently has timers & (experimental) channels that can help. However, I think there is a need for more purpose-made utilities to help more complex asio-based libraries (requests, redis, mysql et al.) Code: https://github.com/klemens-morgenstern/asem Docs: https://klemens.dev/asem/ I'm also not too happy with the name, but so far I only came up with an acronym: Semaphore, Condition_variable, And Mutex. Suggestions are welcome.

1 0

GSOC director stepping down and replacement
by Glen Fernandes 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

David Bellot who has run the Boost GSOC program is retiring from the role: Thank you David, for your service. If anyone wants to step forward and become the new GSOC administrator, Boost can keep the program running. David has generously agreed to help mentor his replacement until the transition is complete. If this sounds interesting to you, or if you have any questions about what the task entails, please don't hesitate to inquire further. Glen

1 0

Boost 1.82.0 is now closed for major changes
by Marshall Clow 05 Mar '23

05 Mar '23

Next deadline: On 8-Mar-2023 Boost 1.82.0 closes the beta release. Still open for serious problem fixes and docs changes without release manager review. As always, the release calendar is at https://www.boost.org/development/ <https://www.boost.org/development/> - Boost release team

1 0

improve <boost/config.hpp>
by Gero Peterhoff 03 Mar '23

03 Mar '23

Hi, for more compatibility with existing boost-macros/defines I came up with - see attachment. 1) Is that correct in principle? 2) Problem: for BOOST_NO_CXX23_HDR_XXX I use __has_include. However, __has_include is not guaranteed to exist. How about the solution? 3) Did I miss useful things? thx Gero

6 6

Re: [boost] Has testing on msvc been dropped?
by Tom Kent 02 Mar '23

02 Mar '23

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 6:13 AM Tom Kent via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 6:16 AM Glen Fernandes <glen.fernandes(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 6:49 AM Daniela Engert wrote: > > > >> I've noticed that e.g. Boost.Log no longer compiles on msvc 19.35 (i.e. > >> VS2022 update 5). Looking at the test matrix to figure out where the > >> problem might lie, I couldn't find any column with the test results of > >> *any* msvc version, lest the current one. Is there a reason for no > >> longer running the tests with msvc compilers? > >> > >> > > I don't believe it's intentional. > > > > Tom, do you know why the MSVC runners aren't reporting any results? > > > > Looks like my windows runner machine has crashed hard, I'm going to try to > resuscitate it. > It was a dead SSD, reinstalled with a brand-new windows OS, should be back up and cycling normally. In the meantime, I kicked off a set of runs on an Azure VM, so there should be stuff up now. Tom

2 1

Has testing on msvc been dropped?
by Daniela Engert 01 Mar '23

01 Mar '23

Hi y'all! I've noticed that e.g. Boost.Log no longer compiles on msvc 19.35 (i.e. VS2022 update 5). Looking at the test matrix to figure out where the problem might lie, I couldn't find any column with the test results of *any* msvc version, lest the current one. Is there a reason for no longer running the tests with msvc compilers? thank, Dani -- PGP/GPG: 2CCB 3ECB 0954 5CD3 B0DB 6AA0 BA03 56A1 2C4638C5

6 21

Re: [boost] Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
by Andre Marin 26 Feb '23

26 Feb '23

Hi, I'm interested in becoming a maintainer. I'm interested in the following projects: - Algorithm <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/algorithm/> - Python <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/python/> - Stl_interfaces <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/stl_interfaces/> - Type Erasure <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/type_erasure/> I'm trying to email olivas(a)icecube.umd.edu, per the Boost website but it's not going through. I'm looking for some guidance. I've included the previous request and email error in this email. Thank you, *Andre Marin * *m:* (832) 495-3545 *e:* andre(a)alexamarin.com <https://www.linkedin.com/in/andremarin629/> On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 11:46 AM Mail Delivery Subsystem < mailer-daemon(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > [image: Error Icon] > Address not found > Your message wasn't delivered to *olivas(a)icecube.umd.edu* because the > address couldn't be found, or is unable to receive mail. > The response from the remote server was: > > 550 5.1.1 <olivas(a)icecube.umd.edu>: Recipient address rejected: User > unknown in local recipient table > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andre Marin <andre(a)alexamarin.com> > To: olivas(a)icecube.umd.edu > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:46:03 -0600 > Subject: Boost Library Official Maintainer Program > Hi, > > I'm interested in becoming a maintainer. I'm interested in the following > projects: > > - Algorithm <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/algorithm/> > - Python <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/python/> > - Stl_interfaces > <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/stl_interfaces/> > - Type Erasure > <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/type_erasure/> > > > I've been limited to C++11 at work and I'm new to library contributions. > I'm not sure if there are more appropriate projects for noobs or areas of > need I couldn't find on the website. > > Thank you, > > *Andre Marin * > *m:* (832) 495-3545 > *e:* andre(a)alexamarin.com > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/andremarin629/> >

2 1

Future of boost::TypeTraits
by Gero Peterhoff 24 Feb '23

24 Feb '23

Hello, with the planned changes of the dependencies of the boost libraries to newer C++-standards, I would like to ask how this is planned for boost::TypeTraits. 1) In my opinion it would make sense to remove all TypeTraits that are already in the standard, and only provide those that do not exist in the standard (yet). Of course, this depends on the planned minimum standard for boost::TypeTraits. 2) If, on the other hand, boost::TypeTraits is to continue to work with C++03 (for which there may be reasons), however, quite a few adjustments must be made (for newer C++-standards) and bugs must be fixed. Examples: a) - no inline-variables are provided for C++17 (if useful), e.g. is_arithmetic_v - no concepts are provided for C++20 (if useful), e.g. arithmetic - that's why I already asked how to do this best without coming into (name)conflicts with existing structures/namespaces/etc. b) bugs - e.g. is_integral does not contain char8_t (if available) Probably my remarks also apply to other libraries, possibly TypeErasure, TypeIndex, TTI ... All this has to be reworked fundamentally and consolidated if necessary. best regards Gero

1 0

Boost Libraries and Dropping C++ Language Support
by Glen Fernandes 24 Feb '23

24 Feb '23

*Boost library authors and maintainers are free to drop support for old C++ standards in their libraries, at any time. * This includes libraries that other Boost libraries depend on. It even includes core libraries like Boost.Core or Boost.Static_Assert. We ask that maintainers do the right thing by all our users (which may include other Boost libraries) by announcing a future breakage *at least two Boost releases in advance*. When that eventual release time arrives, if Boost libraries are broken in older standards modes due to another Boost library dropping support, it will not block the Boost release. This means that we do not need to announce "Boost is dropping C++03" because Boost doesn't "support C++03" now as it is. It means that you, maintainer of Boost.X, should realize that you are free to announce that "Boost.X is dropping C++XY in version 1.Z" as you see fit. Boost in its infancy thrived because its libraries were on the cutting edge. Boost libraries today should similarly not be confined simply because other Boost libraries have chosen to depend on them. Furthermore, as Boost release managers we support authors exercising this freedom, and do not intend to impose any restrictions on what language support they must maintain. We will add a page to the Boost website stating the above formally. -- The release team (Glen Fernandes, Marshall Clow)

8 12

Boost 1.82.0 is now closed for new libraries and breaking changes
by Marshall Clow 23 Feb '23

23 Feb '23

Next deadline: On 1-Mar-2023 Boost 1.82.0 closes for major code changes. Still open for serious problem fixes and docs changes without release manager review. As always, the release calendar is at https://www.boost.org/development/ <https://www.boost.org/development/> - Boost release team

1 0

Fwd: Futex using boost, threads never wakeup
by tsoumplekas_giorgos 23 Feb '23

23 Feb '23

Subject: Futex using boost, threads never wakeup Hello all I posted the following question in stackoverflow https://stackoverflow.com/questions/75538799/futex-using-boost-threads-neve… 0 <https://stackoverflow.com/posts/75538799/timeline> I am studying about futex synchronisation Following up the manual <https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/futex.2.html> , I tried to syncroniaze threads using boost futex However the threads never wake up #include <iostream>#include <atomic>#include <boost/fiber/detail/futex.hpp>#include <thread>#include <vector>#include <chrono>void wait(std::atomic<int> & futexp){ int one = 1; while(std::atomic_compare_exchange_strong(&futexp, &one, 0)) {} std::cout << std::this_thread::get_id() << "," << futexp.load() << std::endl; boost::fibers::detail::futex_wait(&futexp,0); // std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(5000)); }void fpost(std::atomic<int> & futexp){ int zero = 0; if (std::atomic_compare_exchange_strong(&futexp, &zero, 1)) { boost::fibers::detail::futex_wake(&futexp); } } std::atomic<int> futexp{1};int main() { std::vector<std::thread> vec; for(int i =0 ; i< 5;++i) { vec.emplace_back([]() { wait(futexp); fpost(futexp); }); } Code demo <https://godbolt.org/z/94hMsrW4a> I am using boost 1.66 and gcc 9.1 What goes wrong with this piece of code ?

3 2

Boost 1.82 closing for new libraries and breaking changes on 2023-02-24
by Glen Fernandes 22 Feb '23

22 Feb '23

On 02/24: Release branch will close for new libraries and breaking changes to existing libraries. Will still be open for bug fixes and other routine changes to all libraries without release manager review.

1 0

Dropping C++03 support (again)
by Peter Dimov 21 Feb '23

21 Feb '23

Greetings, I have a novel idea, let's drop C++03 support. The reasons to do that have been explicated already a number of times, e.g. in https://pdimov.github.io/articles/phasing_out_cxx03.html#_ongoing_costs_of_… but in brief: * C++03 is 20 years old. * A number of intra-Boost dependencies can be eliminated by using the standard equivalent of Boost components. This will help Boost to become "more modular". * Variadic templates allow us to remove the uses of Preprocessor and MPL, which are the primary contributor to slow Boost compilation times. * Almost no new C++03 development occurs in Boost at this point, so C++03 users do not need to upgrade their Boost. To that end, I propose the following: Boost release 1.82.0 is announced as the last one with C++03 support. If critical problems are found in it post-release, we will issue 1.82.1, 1.82.2 and so on, as appropriate (as C++03 users will not be able to just upgrade to 1.83.) Boost release 1.83.0 is announced to require C++11 at minimum. This means compilers that have all the C++11 standard headers, and support all the C++11 syntactic constructs and keywords without issuing errors. (E.g. VS2013 doesn't qualify because it doesn't support the `constexpr` or `noexcept` keywords.) This proposal should ultimately be approved and implemented by the Boost release managers; their opinions are particularly appreciated.

28 98

Mustache has been REJECTED from boost.
by Klemens Morgenstern 20 Feb '23

20 Feb '23

First I want to thank Peter for the submission and all reviewers for their participation in the review process. Please note that votes don't just get added up, but that details of every review, especially the time & effort spent on it, will influence how reviews get weighed. This review was close, with 3 REJECT, 4 Conditional ACCEPT and 0 ACCEPT votes. Rene, Jens and Darryl voted to accept on the condition that the documentation shall be improved/completed. Ruben's review had more complex conditions, among them this one: > 1. The partials argument must be typed according to the data structure it requires. Peter's response to this was "I don't see how this is supposed to be accomplished." I don't know what to make of the technical details here, but I don't think I can make something that might be impossible to accomplish a condition for acceptance. Julien & Vinnie voted to REJECT based on the state of the library, which makes me believe they might change their vote in a future review. Dmitry voted to REJECT based on the mustache language itself, and thus was the only one to reject boost.mustache in general. Based on the almost even split between conditional accept & reject and the lack of unconditional accepts, I decided to REJECT the library at this time. I hope Peter will submit an improved & extended version of this library for review in the future.

6 6

macro BOOST_HAS_CONCEPTS not work + namespace for concepts
by Gero Peterhoff 20 Feb '23

20 Feb '23

Hi, 1) the macro BOOST_HAS_CONCEPTS from <boost/config.hpp> (https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_81_0/libs/config/doc/html/boost_config/boo…) not work: https://godbolt.org/z/3G8vTrjcf 2) namespace for concepts Would it make sense to introduce a namespace *only* for concepts to avoid naming conflicts with existing classes? boost::concepts would be useful, but this is already used by the concept-check-library. Then would boost::Concepts be a good choice or could boost::concepts still be used? EG namespace boost { template <typename Type> struct my_trait ...; #if !defined(BOOST_NO_CXX17_INLINE_VARIABLES) template <typename Type> inline constexpr bool my_trait_v = my_trait<Type>::value; #endif #if concepts available namespace Concepts { template <typename Type> concept my_concept = my_trait_v<Type>; } // Concepts #endif } // boost thx Gero

4 10

Review of mustache starts today.
by Klemens Morgenstern 19 Feb '23

19 Feb '23

The formal review of the mustache starts today, Sunday the 5th, and ends next week on Tuesday the 14th. The library was developed & submitted by Peter Dimov. Boost.Mustache is an implementation of Mustache templates in C++11. The master branch is frozen during the review and can be found here https://github.com/pdimov/mustache The current documentation can be found here: https://pdimov.github.io/mustache/doc/html/mustache.html Boost.Mustache is an implementation of Mustache templates in C++11. The documentation of Mustache templates is here: https://mustache.github.io/ Review ======== Please explicitly state that you either *accept* or *reject* the inclusion of this library into boost. The accept can be conditional. Also please indicate the time & effort spent on the evaluation and give the reasons for your decision. The review is open to anyone who is prepared to put in the work of evaluating and reviewing the library. Prior experience in contributing to Boost reviews is not a requirement. Some questions to consider: - Does this library bring real benefit to C++ developers for real world use-case? - Do you have an application for this library? - Does the API match with current best practices? - Is the documentation helpful and clear? - Did you try to use it? What problems or surprises did you encounter? - What is your evaluation of the implementation? More information about the Boost Formal Review Process can be found at: http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html Reviews can also be submitted directly to me. Thank you Peter for submitting yet another boost library & thanks for all the reviews in advance. Building boost.mustache ======================= Here's how to build the library, starting from scratch: 1. Clone Boost from Github: git clone --recurse-submodules https://github.com/boostorg/boost 2. Clone the Mustache library into the Boost tree: cd boost/libs git clone https://github.com/pdimov/mustache cd .. 3. Build b2: ./bootstrap.sh (We assume Linux and g++ from now on. On Windows, it's just `booststrap`.) 4. Generate the header links in the boost/ directory: ./b2 headers 5. Build the Mustache library and its dependencies (e.g. JSON): ./b2 --with-mustache This will place the compiled libraries into the stage/lib directory. It should contain libboost_container.a/.so, libboost_json.a/.so, and liboost_mustache.a/.so. You can now build and run the Mustache examples by using e.g. g++ libs/mustache/example/html.cpp -o html -I . -L stage/lib -lboost_mustache -lboost_json ./html

20 60

boost::math::tools::promote_args not works with C++23 FP-types
by Gero Peterhoff 19 Feb '23

19 Feb '23

Hi, promote_args from <boost/math/tools/promotion.hpp> not works with new/extended C++23 FP-types https://godbolt.org/z/13fq8a3d7 The problem might be the outdated "manual variadic" implementation for C++03. Well, according to the documentation (https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_81_0) boost::math requires C++11 anyway; with a switch to C++11 it also works (std::common_type). This issue also affects some implementations in boost::math::policies. PS: We have (at least) 3 different definitions for the *same* boost::float128(_type/_t) type 1) <boost/config.hpp>: boost::float128_type 2) <boost/math/cstdfloat/cstdfloat_types.hpp>/<boost/math/cstdfloat/cstdfloat_cmath.hpp>: BOOST_CSTDFLOAT_FLOAT128_NATIVE_TYPE/float128_t 3) <boost/math/tools/config.hpp>: BOOST_MATH_FLOAT128_TYPE :-( thx Gero

3 2

Mustache review has ended
by Klemens Morgenstern 19 Feb '23

19 Feb '23

The review of Mustache has ended, thanks to everyone who wrote a review! I would also like to thank the review wizards for granting the extension. That really helped to get us more reviews. I'll try to announce the review results soon, but please note that this is another close call that will need some careful consideration.

2 1

Release Notes: Markdown to replace QBK
by Vinnie Falco 18 Feb '23

18 Feb '23

We need to re-render all of this historical release notes, such as: <https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_81_0.html> to be in the style of the new website. This is being taken care of, but it will affect the release process as follows: * Each author will edit the release notes for their library using markdown instead of Quickbook format, as a pull request against a file here: <https://github.com/boostorg/website/tree/master/feed/history> The syntax will be GitHub flavored markdown, with a few Boost-specific extensions (for example, to link against an issue in a boostorg repo). Does anyone object or have comments about this? -- Regards, Vinnie Follow me on GitHub: https://github.com/vinniefalco

7 21

[mustache review] Period has been extended until the 18th
by Klemens Morgenstern 17 Feb '23

17 Feb '23

Due to the few reviews and the overlap with the WG21 meeting I have successfully petitioned the review wizards to extend the review period until next Saturday, the 18th of february. Please consider writing a boost.mustache review, since only two have been submitted up to now.

2 2