From: John Moeller (fishcorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-15 04:15:14
Not that anyone cares about my personal status on this project, but I
thought I'd share some progress that I made.
1. I think I understand what the library does (that took a few days of
study all in itself :) ). The class graph stuff went over my head, but
I'm neither familiar with BGL nor with Graph Theory in general (though
it's probably within my reach if I spent the time). I can see vaguely
what its purpose is, however.
2. I got the source building, with a new Jamfile.v2. That didn't take
terribly long, and I got a little more familiar with the build system.
3. I worked on getting each test to run.
3a. I had trouble getting the holder.cpp test to build. The override
function object returns a proxy, and the proxy doesn't like being cast
to an int for some reason, even though it seems to me that the
conversion should work just fine. I tried the pointer conversion, but
the assertions failed. I eventually gave up on this test, because I was
more interested in getting the invoker class working.
3b. The tests that use the invoker class wouldn't build because they
were using a version of fusion that was out-of-date. After about a week
of study, I figured out that I needed to make some fundamental changes
to how fusion was utilized in the invoker. I also discovered that
fusion is very cool.
It seems to me that the way things worked before was to create the
transform view of the function arguments with the proper converters, and
call a generate metafunction, that when constructed with a sequence
iterator, generated a tuple with all the correct argument converters:
I basically replaced meta::generate with result_of::as_list; it seems
that this is the way that you get a type that can be instantiated with a
Unfortunately, list's constructor doesn't take an iterator; it takes a
sequence, so I had to add sequence support to fusion_arg_iterator, in
addition to modifying the iterator.
The invoker-related tests pass now. However, I wanted to be certain
that I didn't fundamentally destroy the way that things were supposed to
work, so that's why I'm posting what I changed.
4. I got a test jamfile working. All the tests use assert(), though,
and not Boost:Test asserts. I didn't change any of them.
5. I got autolinking working.
So now that I've done all that, should I get some of this into CVS? Or
should I post some diffs up? If I should commit these changes to CVS, I
think that I would need access, but I don't know if I'm supposed to have
that. I'm not a developer with an approved project. (Or can I commit
with anonymous CVS? I've never developed using anonymous CVS.) Either
way, I don't really want to lose this work.
Another thing; Fusion has invocation support now. I looked into it
briefly, and it seems that it may allow some contraction of the invoker
code; at least, it could replace a good portion of aux::invoke. Is this
something that you would be interested in seeing done? Or should it be
Sorry for the wall of text.
-- John Moeller fishcorn_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk