Date: 2001-07-25 03:19:32
--- In boost_at_y..., Jeremy Siek <jsiek_at_r...> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 alexanderdz_at_y... wrote:
> > I wrote test program which you can find below and found following
> > problems:
> > A. The depth_first_search algorithm always calls back_edge method
> If you record predecessors you can check if the edge passed to
> back_edge() is really a tree edge. Perhaps this check should be
> encorporated into depth_first_search().
I would like to. Otherwise it require me to dig to the roots of
graph theory and implementation of concrete algorithms. Which I was
lazy to do.
> Anyways, here's how you
> could change your cycle_detector visitor to do this:
> template <class ParentMap>
> struct cycle_detector : public dfs_visitor<>
Thanks! It works.
> > B. The library quite often brings compiler to its knees. For
> > example, if you comment the line following "// Internal compiler
> > error if commented out", VC 6 sp5 fails with internal compiler >
> > error. ...
> I've tried to avoid as many VC++ internal compiler errors as
> possible, and have spent a lot of time doing this, but I'm afraid I
> can't dedicate more time to this. Please report internal compiler
> errors to the VC++ team.
I'll do that. Unfortunately, it can't help me. Hope to find the
workaround next time.
> > C. To got compile error in line B if I pass visitor the way
> > analogous to line A. To be more precise, I can't write line B
> > following way, as I did for line A
> > vertex_processor proc;
> > depth_first_visit(g, vertices(g).first, visitor(proc), ...
> The reason is that the depth_first_visit() function does not use
> named template parameters, but just normal template parameters. So
> it is incorrect to pass visitor(proc) to depth_first_visit().
What is the reason having different interfaces for two closely
Thank you for your help!
With best wishes,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk