- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

Re: [boost] [thread] synchronized_value: value and move semantics
by Andrey Semashev 24 Sep '13

24 Sep '13

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:02 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba < vicente.botet(a)wanadoo.fr> wrote: > > Hi, > > boost::synchronized_value (not released yet [1][2][3]) is based on [4]. > See below part of this paper adapted to the Boost.Thread interface. > > Currently boost::synchronized_value is in addition Copyable and Swappable. > I was wondering if it is worth adding value and move semantics to > synchronized_value. Making it EqualityComparable, LessThanComparable and > Movable if the underlying type satisfy these requirements will allow to > store them on a Boost.Container/C++11 container. > > Do you see something completely wrong with this addition? > Has some of you had a need for this? Could you share the context? > Sorry, I missed this discussion somehow. I've taken a quick look at the interface and have a few questions: 1. Why are there strict_lock_ptr and unique_lock_ptr? What are the differences and why we can't have one such ptr (presumably, unique_lock_ptr)? 2. I find value() and get() a bit confusing, since it is not apparent what is the difference between them. Maybe value() could be renamed to get_ref() or unsafe_get()? 3. Am I correct that having strict_lock_ptr/unique_lock_ptr acquired by calling synchronize() will not deadlock with operator-> when a non-recursive mutex is used?

5 11

Re: [boost] [Boost-users] cross-compilation x86_64-w64-ming32: undefined reference to `InterlockedIncrement'
by Frédéric Bron 24 Sep '13

24 Sep '13

So I eventually managed to fix the issue with interlocked.hpp and mingw-w64: both i686 and x86_64 now work. Attached is a patch against 1.54.0. Is it possible to include this in 1.55.0? Regards, Frédéric

3 17

Is there any interest in a library for application : Boost.Application, new version: Boost.Application_beta_3a_release_2
by Renato Forti 23 Sep '13

23 Sep '13

Hi all, The docs and lib are updated! Please, send your comments. http://www.dokfile.com/appbeta3/docs/libs/application/doc/html/index.html PS: I want to take and ask for help, if any native english speaker can help me with the documentation! Please, contact: re.tf <at> acm.org Thanks

5 8

Referencing Boost.Iostreams in the documentation of a non-boost library
by Gene Panov 23 Sep '13

23 Sep '13

Boost Experts, I am a fan of Boost.Iostreams and I am referencing them several times in the documentation of a little library that I wrote and posted on Google Code under "New BSD license" (https://code.google.com/p/async-ostream/) Do I need to provide a full URL or copyright information or anything else to make such reference to Boost.Iostreams legally sound? Or shall I just switch to use Boost Software License instead to keep it simple? Thanks! Gene

3 2

Functionality for part 7(a) of Boost.IOStreams Roadmap
by Gene Panov 23 Sep '13

23 Sep '13

Boost Experts, I think I possibly addressed the "output" part of requirement 7(a) (Support for asynchronous and non-blocking I/O :: asio compatibility) from the Iostreams Roadmap https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/IostreamsRoadmap in this library https://code.google.com/p/async-ostream/ Do you think it addresses that requirement from the roadmap? If yes, does it make sense if I make a patch for Boost.Iostreams to include those five files? Regards, Gene

1 0

[predef] [git] Do the tests need an explicit <dependency>
by Steven Watanabe 22 Sep '13

22 Sep '13

AMDG The property <dependency>$(BOOST_PREDEF_INCLUDE_ROOT)/boost/predef.hpp interferes with testing under the git layout, because this header is generated as part of the build. Is there a reason for it? The dependency should be found by the #include scanner. In Christ, Steven Watanabe

2 1

[config] Visual C++ 2013 RC support - variadic template failures
by Beman Dawes 21 Sep '13

21 Sep '13

I updated boost/config Visual C++ support yesterday to add Visual C++ 2013 RC support. But Mat Berchtold reported that signals2 tests then started to fail. I confirmed that 2013 RC tests were failing for signals2 and several of its dependencies, and narrowed it down to variadic templates so reverted to defining BOOST_NO_CXX11_VARIADIC_TEMPLATES for 2013 RC. --Beman

3 6

[Operators] empty_base should be untemplated?
by Andrew Ho 21 Sep '13

21 Sep '13

I've noticed about the empty_base class is that it's templated with type T, and I don't think it should be. Fyi, the empty_base class is there to turn multiple inheritance into a single inheritance chain (due to compiler deficiencies/object size bloat on at least Visual Studio). I don't see why this empty_base should be templated, and it would be better suited if it wasn't since all I can think it does is make the compiler work harder. Does anyone know why it was templated to begin with? Additionally, are we safe to change empty_base to be not use templates?

4 4

Boost reviews
by Edward Diener 21 Sep '13

21 Sep '13

I have not seen any new reviews of libraries for Boost in a long time. Is this because: * There are very few libraries on the review queue. * There are no people willing to act as review managers for library reviews. * Boost already has so many libraries that an effort has been made to slow down reviews to a great extent. * There is little interest for new Boost libraries in the community of developers who follow Boost. * The transition to git and ryppl is taking precedence before any new libraries will be reviewed. * There are not enough reviewers when a library does have a review in order to decide whether or not a library should be accepted into Boost. Or perhaps some combination of these possibilities. As someone who still would like to see my variadic data library be reviewed for possible acceptance into Boost I am most curious to know the reasons why no new libraries appear to be getting reviewed anymore.

5 7

[multi_index][intel-linux-14.0.0][repost] Help needed debugging initializer list support
by Joaquin M Lopez Munoz 21 Sep '13

21 Sep '13

Hi, Any kind soul can help with this? Reposting: The trunk version of Boost.MultiIndex introduces support for initializer list, which seems to work fine with regression tests except for intel-linux-14.0.0: http://tinyurl.com/pclssoe http://tinyurl.com/nzwzpu6 which spits error messages like this (replaced large chunks of text with *** for clarity): ../libs/multi_index/test/test_modifiers.cpp(230): error: no instance of overloaded function "boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index<***>::insert [***]" matches the argument list argument types are: ({...}) object type is: employee_set_by_name i1.insert({{4,"Vanessa",20,9236},{5,"Penelope",55,2358}}); At first I thought this is failing because for it to work the compiler should not only support initializer lists but also C++11 unified initialization syntax, but I think this is not the problem because a) intel-linux-14.0.0 does indeed seem to support unified initialization syntax, since BOOST_NO_CXX11_UNIFIED_INITIALIZATION_SYNTAX is not listed in http://tinyurl.com/ndutn2w . b) the following test code also fails: s.assign({0,1,2,3,4,5}); with s a multi_index_container of ints, and this does not depend on unified initialization syntaxes. The error message here, FWIW, is different than before: ../libs/multi_index/test/test_copy_assignment.cpp(56): internal error: assertion failed: node_has_side_effects: bad node kind (shared/cfe/edgcpfe/il.c, line 20611) The tested code seems simple enough, for instance lines 271 and following of multi_index_container.hpp look like: #if !defined(BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_INITIALIZER_LIST) multi_index_container( std::initializer_list<Value> list, const ctor_args_list& args_list=ctor_args_list(), const allocator_type& al=allocator_type()) [...] and the ofending assign member function in sequenced_index.hpp is as innocent as: #if !defined(BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_INITIALIZER_LIST) void assign(std::initializer_list<value_type> list) { assign(list.begin(),list.end()); } #endif Besides, other libs with initializer list support such as Boost.SmartPtr and Boost.Unordered cope fine with this compiler. Clues? Any help much appreciated. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica Digital

1 0