[units] Pull request and RFC: information unit definitions for Boost.Units
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3 Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte, nat, hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi Example code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c... Unit testing code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte, nat, hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
In the interest of describing a use case, the reason I found myself wanting this was that for my ongoing edit_distance() project, I want to allow a user to specify a memory limit for the computation. Boost.Units is a nice vehicle for that, since it allows a user to: (a) specify a memory limit in whatever units and scale they choose, e.g. (10 * si::mega * bytes) or (1 * si::giga * bytes), etc. (b) be unambiguous that it is a quantity of memory, as opposed to some generic numeric value. Contrast with typical solutions that say things like "supply an integer that represents the memory limit, in megabytes" I also intend to support time limits on the computation, and so by the same logic my plan is to allow the user to supply a time limit using a Boost.Units time quantity, in any supported unit based on time_dimension. Obviously, units of information could support other kinds of use, e.g. applying units to entropies, as in the example code.
I'd like to get this in, unless there's some objections. Who curates the units library? ----- Original Message -----
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte, nat, hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
In the interest of describing a use case, the reason I found myself wanting this was that for my ongoing edit_distance() project, I want to allow a user to specify a memory limit for the computation. Boost.Units is a nice vehicle for that, since it allows a user to:
(a) specify a memory limit in whatever units and scale they choose, e.g. (10 * si::mega * bytes) or (1 * si::giga * bytes), etc. (b) be unambiguous that it is a quantity of memory, as opposed to some generic numeric value.
Contrast with typical solutions that say things like "supply an integer that represents the memory limit, in megabytes"
I also intend to support time limits on the computation, and so by the same logic my plan is to allow the user to supply a time limit using a Boost.Units time quantity, in any supported unit based on time_dimension.
Obviously, units of information could support other kinds of use, e.g. applying units to entropies, as in the example code.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
boost/libs/maintainers.txt has a list of libraries and maintainers units Matthias Schabel <boost -at- schabel-family.org>, Steven Watanabe <steven -at- providere-consulting.com> On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 5:49 AM, Erik Erlandson <eje@redhat.com> wrote:
I'd like to get this in, unless there's some objections. Who curates the units library?
----- Original Message -----
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte,
hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code:
https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code:
https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
In the interest of describing a use case, the reason I found myself wanting this was that for my ongoing edit_distance() project, I want to allow a user to specify a memory limit for the computation. Boost.Units is a nice vehicle for that, since it allows a user to:
(a) specify a memory limit in whatever units and scale they choose, e.g. (10 * si::mega * bytes) or (1 * si::giga * bytes), etc. (b) be unambiguous that it is a quantity of memory, as opposed to some generic numeric value.
Contrast with typical solutions that say things like "supply an integer
nat, that
represents the memory limit, in megabytes"
I also intend to support time limits on the computation, and so by the same logic my plan is to allow the user to supply a time limit using a Boost.Units time quantity, in any supported unit based on time_dimension.
Obviously, units of information could support other kinds of use, e.g. applying units to entropies, as in the example code.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte, nat, hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
I've been unable to raise a response from either Steven Watanabe or Matthias Schabel, either on- or off-list. It would be nice to get a thumbs up or thumbs down so I can make a decision on how to proceed with my other project.
I would love to pass the responsibility for ongoing maintenance of Boost.Units on to a new torchbearer. My time to dedicate to this project has dwindled to essentially zero, and I believe it would be best for all involved to enlist some fresh blood, ideally someone who is using the library on a regular basis... Any volunteers? As far as Erik's request, I don't have any objections to adding these to the library, though I have not had time myself to verify that they are correct. Matthias
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte, nat, hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
I've been unable to raise a response from either Steven Watanabe or Matthias Schabel, either on- or off-list. It would be nice to get a thumbs up or thumbs down so I can make a decision on how to proceed with my other project.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Matthias Schabel Sent: 31 July 2014 19:26 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [units] Pull request and RFC: information unit definitions for Boost.Units
I would love to pass the responsibility for ongoing maintenance of Boost.Units on to a new torchbearer. My time to dedicate to this project has dwindled to essentially zero, and I believe it would be best for all involved to enlist some fresh blood, ideally someone who is using the library on a regular basis... Any volunteers?
I'm sorry, but not me. But thanks nevertheless for all your work over many years on this valuable Boost library. It has made it possible to write safer scientific software. (Though sadly not easy because units are a terrible mess - and not all Imperial Idiocy). Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830
----- Original Message -----
I would love to pass the responsibility for ongoing maintenance of Boost.Units on to a new torchbearer. My time to dedicate to this project has dwindled to essentially zero, and I believe it would be best for all involved to enlist some fresh blood, ideally someone who is using the library on a regular basis... Any volunteers?
I am willing to throw my hat in the wing, but to date I've not contributed even one patch to boost, much less maintained a library. There must be other candidates with better qualifications. Boost.Units doesn't seem like a high-maintenance library (my own PR not withstanding). It's coverage of existing units is already quite good.
As far as Erik's request, I don't have any objections to adding these to the library, though I have not had time myself to verify that they are correct.
Matthias
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte, nat, hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code: https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
I've been unable to raise a response from either Steven Watanabe or Matthias Schabel, either on- or off-list. It would be nice to get a thumbs up or thumbs down so I can make a decision on how to proceed with my other project.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Does Boost.Units has a new maintainer yet? Otherwise it might be worth to advertise in the mailing list that we are looking for a new maintainer. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Erik Erlandson <eje@redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
I would love to pass the responsibility for ongoing maintenance of Boost.Units on to a new torchbearer. My time to dedicate to this project has dwindled to essentially zero, and I believe it would be best for all involved to enlist some fresh blood, ideally someone who is using the library on a regular basis... Any volunteers?
I am willing to throw my hat in the wing, but to date I've not contributed even one patch to boost, much less maintained a library. There must be other candidates with better qualifications.
Boost.Units doesn't seem like a high-maintenance library (my own PR not withstanding). It's coverage of existing units is already quite good.
As far as Erik's request, I don't have any objections to adding these to
the
library, though I have not had time myself to verify that they are correct.
Matthias
----- Original Message -----
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Description: Adds unit definitions for standard units of information: bit, byte,
nat,
hartley, shannon. Defines a new unit system boost::units::information for convenient manipulation. Also includes IEC binary prefixes: kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, pebi, exbi
Example code:
https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/example/information.c...
Unit testing code:
https://github.com/erikerlandson/units/blob/info_units/test/test_information...
I've been unable to raise a response from either Steven Watanabe or Matthias Schabel, either on- or off-list. It would be nice to get a thumbs up or thumbs down so I can make a decision on how to proceed with my other project.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Hi Matthias, Am Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2014, 11:25:35 schrieb Matthias Schabel:
I would love to pass the responsibility for ongoing maintenance of Boost.Units on to a new torchbearer.
First a "Thank you very much" for the great library.
My time to dedicate to this project has dwindled to essentially zero, and I believe it would be best for all involved to enlist some fresh blood, ideally someone who is using the library on a regular basis... Any volunteers?
As no one else has stepped up, I'd like to volunteer. I've been using Boost.Units with great success for the last five years. For my recent Boost contributions see https://github.com/jhunold. Mostly small bugfixes, Boost.Build support over the last decade. Boost.Units is getting more attentions now as c++11 is getting momentum. Personally, I'd like to get https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/5 into 1.57.
As far as Erik's request, I don't have any objections to adding these to the library, though I have not had time myself to verify that they are correct.
It would be nice if one of the current maintainer could comment on this.
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Seems obsolete, https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/6 it the improved commit. Feel free to ask questions. Yours, Jürgen -- * Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! * voice: ++49 4257 300 ! Fährstraße 1 * fax : ++49 4257 300 ! 31609 Balge/Sebbenhausen * jhunold@gmx.eu ! Germany
----- Original Message -----
Hi Matthias,
Am Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2014, 11:25:35 schrieb Matthias Schabel:
I would love to pass the responsibility for ongoing maintenance of Boost.Units on to a new torchbearer.
First a "Thank you very much" for the great library.
My time to dedicate to this project has dwindled to essentially zero, and I believe it would be best for all involved to enlist some fresh blood, ideally someone who is using the library on a regular basis... Any volunteers?
As no one else has stepped up, I'd like to volunteer. I've been using Boost.Units with great success for the last five years. For my recent Boost contributions see https://github.com/jhunold. Mostly small bugfixes, Boost.Build support over the last decade. Boost.Units is getting more attentions now as c++11 is getting momentum. Personally, I'd like to get https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/5 into 1.57.
As far as Erik's request, I don't have any objections to adding these to the library, though I have not had time myself to verify that they are correct.
It would be nice if one of the current maintainer could comment on this.
Hi Jürgen, I think if the current maintainers had the bandwidth to review my PR, we wouldn't be looking for new maintainers :) On that topic, my attempts to get in touch with Steven Watanabe have been unsuccessful so far. If anybody has a secret bat signal for him, I'd be grateful if they could raise him. With that in mind, I'm interested in your assessment of my PR. It sounds like you have substantially more experience contributing to and maintaining Boost than I do.
Link to PR: https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/3
Seems obsolete, https://github.com/boostorg/units/pull/6 it the improved commit.
Feel free to ask questions.
Yours,
Jürgen -- * Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! * voice: ++49 4257 300 ! Fährstraße 1 * fax : ++49 4257 300 ! 31609 Balge/Sebbenhausen * jhunold@gmx.eu ! Germany
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Hi Erik, Am Samstag, 16. August 2014, 14:49:16 schrieb Erik Erlandson:
It would be nice if one of the current maintainer could comment on this.
I think if the current maintainers had the bandwidth to review my PR, we wouldn't be looking for new maintainers :) On that topic, my attempts to get in touch with Steven Watanabe have been unsuccessful so far. If anybody has a secret bat signal for him, I'd be grateful if they could raise him.
Me too.
With that in mind, I'm interested in your assessment of my PR. It sounds like you have substantially more experience contributing to and maintaining Boost than I do.
As I said before, mostly bugfixes. But most people start small :-) I'd like to have a definite response on "go/no go" for maintainership before I invest some of my scarce time on this. If nothing happens the rest of the week, I'll take a closer look at your PR and maybe call for the maintenance team. Things might also be stalled due to vacation times, which will render my unavailable for most of the next three weeks... Yours, Jürgen -- * Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! * voice: ++49 4257 300 ! Fährstraße 1 * fax : ++49 4257 300 ! 31609 Balge/Sebbenhausen * jhunold@gmx.eu ! Germany
AMDG On 08/18/2014 01:10 PM, Jürgen Hunold wrote:
With that in mind, I'm interested in your assessment of my PR. It sounds like you have substantially more experience contributing to and maintaining Boost than I do.
As I said before, mostly bugfixes. But most people start small :-)
I'd like to have a definite response on "go/no go" for maintainership before I invest some of my scarce time on this.
Go for it. In Christ, Steven Watanabe
Hi Steven, Am Dienstag, 19. August 2014, 14:22:11 schrieb Steven Watanabe:
AMDG
On 08/18/2014 01:10 PM, Jürgen Hunold wrote:
With that in mind, I'm interested in your assessment of my PR. It sounds like you have substantially more experience contributing to and maintaining Boost than I do.
As I said before, mostly bugfixes. But most people start small :-)
I'd like to have a definite response on "go/no go" for maintainership before I invest some of my scarce time on this.
Go for it.
Thanks a lot. Done. See https://github.com/boostorg/admin/issues/83 for my request. Please bear with me as I want to check the current repository state first. The plan is to tackle the simple pull requests afterwards and then come back to the features. Yours, Jürgen -- * Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold ! * voice: ++49 4257 300 ! Fährstraße 1 * fax : ++49 4257 300 ! 31609 Balge/Sebbenhausen * jhunold@gmx.eu ! Germany
----- Original Message -----
Done. See https://github.com/boostorg/admin/issues/83 for my request.
Please bear with me as I want to check the current repository state first. The plan is to tackle the simple pull requests afterwards and then come back to the features.
That's great -- congrats and best of luck! Erik
participants (7)
-
Erik Erlandson -
Gonzalo BG -
Jürgen Hunold -
Marshall Clow -
Matthias Schabel -
Paul A. Bristow -
Steven Watanabe