- Boost-announce - lists.boost.org

[boost] [Polynomial] Review Result
by John Maddock 09 Apr '09

09 Apr '09

Apologies for the delay in putting this together... First off I'd like to thank the author for submitting this for review - I wish all our SOC students were similarly diligent! :-) We received a number of reviews of this library, but none were in favor of acceptance in its current form, and most thought that there was still a fair bit of work to do to get the library into shape. However, most thought that the library could be accepted into Boost given sufficient changes/enhancements. Therefore the library is not accepted into Boost at this time, but I would like to encourage the author to continue to work on the library and resubmit at a future time. In no particular order the main review comments are summarized below: Principal comments: * Documentation, especially the background is inadequate and needs a good proofreading a) From the examples are nothing that a competent programmer couldn't figure out from the declarations. Some more interesting or useful examples would be nice, particularly for things like the special forms. It's not exactly clear what I would do with those functions. b) There is no documentation or references to the various algorithms used. Those, too, would be nice. c) Doc.html appear to have been created 'the Hard Way'. Would be much more useful and look nicer if produced with the Quickbook, Doxygen... toolchain. And make it maintainable by other people. * Use of constructors and assignment operators that modify their arguments isn't acceptable - best to find another interface for this. * Several reviewers noted that the code didn't build for them, in particular log2 isn't available on all platforms/compilers. * evaluate_polynomial() and evaluate_polynomial_faithfully() take their coefficient arguments in the opposite order of all the other functions/constructors in the library, without providing any reason for that choice. That's seems somewhat surprising. I'd suggest fixing that, or at the very least providing an argument in the documentation why this makes some sense. * Rename evaluate() to horner() and provide evaluate() as an inline call to horner(). * Rename evaluate_faithfully() to compensated_horner(). * Things that say "Be careful about this" generally need fixing. * It would be nice to have operator* and operator/ as well as *= and /=. * Considering they share the same core algorithm, it might be nice to have a function that could do division and return the remainder at the same time. Something like poly::divide(P &divisor, P &quotient, P &remainer) * FFTs are good for multiplying polynomials above a certain size, but they are rather heavy for small polynomials and can lead to unexpected crosstalk between terms. There should be an option for * that doesn't use the FFT, and it should be the default for small polynomials. * operator/= has a hardcoded "std::vector<double> new_coefficients" that later gets rounded?? This should be fixed to work with any type that fulfills the necessary conceptual requirements (and tested and documented what those requirements are - it would be nice if they were the same as the rest of Boost.Math). * The name FieldType is mathematically misleading since the instantiating type is very likely not to be a field (e.g. int or a multiple precision integer type). * the Polynomial class provides a fairly minimalist set of supported functions. This may well be deliberate (if so, apologies), but I would like to see a richer interface including such things as - content (gcd of coefficients, where that makes sense) - polynomial discriminant - resultant of 2 polynomials - evaluation of homogeneous polynomial ( f(x) = sum c_i x^i,f(a,b) = sum c_i a^i b^(d-i) ) - evaluation at a polynomial (f(g(x))) - Pseudo-division of polynomials - finding roots over C - finding roots over F_p - factorisation over Z - factorisation over F_p * We had one feature request for extending support to finite fields. * This constructor: template<typename U> polynomial(const U& v); had me a little confused at first - is there any advantage to making this a template rather than simply accepting a const FieldType& as the single argument? * It's not clear from the documentation what this constructor does: polynomial(InputIterator first1, InputIterator last1, InputIterator first2); It needs to clearly state the degree of the resulting polynomial and whether it passes through all/any of the points - in fact maybe the constructor should have a final parameter for the degree of the polynomial and use least-squares fitting when required? Likewise for the member function template<typename InputIterator> void interpolate(InputIterator first1, InputIterator last1, InputIterator first2); * Operators: the / and % operators need good descriptions of what they do, given that no exact division is possible. As someone else has already noted, a function to calculate divide and remainder in one step would be useful too. * GCD: presumably this is restricted to polynomials with integer coefficients? If so it should say so. * Evaluation: The docs should say what method is used for the evaluate_faithfully method and give a reference. Renaming as someone else suggested may be better too, but personally I'm easy either way on that. I'm not sure whether there should be an evaluate_by_preconditioning method, shouldn't the polynomial "know" that it has been preconditioned and react accordingly. I haven't looked/checked but do the usual arithmetic operators still work if the polynomial has been preconditioned? I assume probably not, but if that's the case there should be a stern warning to that effect, *and* checks in code to prevent us from doing something stupid :-) BTW, preconditioning can be applied to polynomials of any degree I believe it's just that it gets hard to implement in the generic case. In addition I'd like to see the evaluation functions templated, so that the type being evaluated can differ from FieldType - it would surely be quite common for example to create and manipulate polynomials with integer coefficients, but then want to evaluate on a floating point type. There is machinery in Boost.Math BTW to handle the mixed argument-promotion and calculation of the result type, let me know if you need help in using this. * Special Forms: the functions provided do *not* generate polynomials in the alternative forms, but rather generate the named polynomial of order N, which is rather less useful, but at the very least the docs need updating to reflect this. * test_arithmetics.cpp fails on cygwin: or at least it did once I added a using std::pow; to start of operator*= to get things compiling. * None of the code builds with msvc: there are a couple of issues here: friend polynomial<FieldType> boost::math::tools::gcd<>(polynomial<FieldType> u, polynomial<FieldType> v); Needs to be changed to: friend polynomial<FieldType> boost::math::tools::gcd<FieldType>(polynomial<FieldType> u, polynomial<FieldType> v); to get msvc to Grok the code. After that there are a bunch of failures due to the use of log2 which msvc doesn't support (and since it's not part of the std other compilers are likely to complain too). * I haven't looked too hard at the implementation, except to echo the comments posted previously that the Conceptual requirements for FieldType need documenting and *testing*. There are concept checking classes and archetypes in Boost.Math which may be of use here. Again, shout if you need help in figuring out how to use these. I did notice that operator*= for example uses std::complex<double> internally which effectively limits the precision that can be achieved - to be useful to me - and to replace the existing "implementation detail" polynomial class in Boost.Math - I would need the polynomial class to be usable with arbitrary precision types such as NTL::RR or mpfr_class. Also as previously noted, multiplication of small polynomials may well be more efficient with the "naive" algorithm, so some performance tests and experimenting is required here. Related to this, use of "round" should be restricted to types that are known to be integers? Regards, John Maddock Review Manager for Polynomial Library. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

BoostCon 2009 Schedule Now Live
by David Abrahams 24 Mar '09

24 Mar '09

The official schedule is now live at http://www.boostcon.com/program! A few highlights of the "mouth-watering content" (in the words of one enrollee) are: * A keynote address from Andrei Alexandrescu called "Iterators Must Go." It's sure to be provocative! * Troy Straszheim's presentations on how high-energy physicists are using Boost to process massive datasets as they go "Icefishing for Neutrinos" and on Kamasu, his library for offloading computation to your machine's GPU. * Two hands-on sessions where we'll start recoding parts of Boost for C++0x, applying rvalue references, variadic templates, decltype, and advanced SFINAE capabilities using the latest GCC. * "Practical C++ Test-Driven Development with Boost.Test and Bmock," by Asher Sterkin * A session on compiler construction using Boost.Spirit v2, from Hartmut Kaiser and Joel de Guzman The complete list of sessions covers a wide range of other Boost and C++-related topics. It is available at http://www.boostcon.com/program/sessions. Please have a look, and please, sign up for the conference! Remember, registration for the whole week is just $599 before April 1st. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com

1 0

[boost] [Review] Polynomial library review begins today
by John Maddock 10 Mar '09

10 Mar '09

The review of Pawel Kieliszczyk's Polynomial library begins today and ends on Thurs 19th March. Download of the zip file from the vault is here: http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=polyno… Otherwise the library is present in the sandbox here: https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/SOC/2008/polynomial/ And the docs can be read online here: https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/SOC/2008/polynomial/libs/docs/index… The polynomial library contains a single class - polynomial<FieldType> - used for the manipulation of polynomials, along with a selection of algorithms which operate upon them. The library is an extension/ rewrite of the existing "implementation detail" polynomial class in Boost.Math, and was written as part of last years Google Summer of Code under the mentorship of Fernando Cacciola. What to include in Review Comments ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers. The goal of a Boost library review is to improve the library through constructive criticism, and at the end a decision must be made: is the library good enough at this point to accept into Boost? If not, we hope to have provided enough constructive criticism for it to be improved and accepted at a later time. The Serialization library is a good example of how constructive criticism resulted in revisions resulting in an excellent library that was accepted in its second review. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: * What is your evaluation of the design? * What is your evaluation of the implementation? * What is your evaluation of the documentation? * What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? * Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? * How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? * Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: * Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Many reviews include questions for library authors. Authors are interested in defending their library against your criticisms; otherwise they would not have brought their library up for review. If you don't get a response to your question quickly, be patient; if it takes too long or you don't get an answer you feel is sufficient, ask again or try to rephrase the question. Do remember that English is not the native language for many Boosters, and that can cause misunderstandings. E-mail is a poor communication medium, and even if messages rarely get lost in transmission, they often get drowned in the deluge of other messages. Don't assume that an unanswered message means you're being ignored. Given constructively, criticism will be taken better and have more positive effects, and you'll get the answers you want. John Maddock. Review Manager for Polynomial Library. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

[1.38.0] PDF package of Boost documentation released.
by John Maddock 21 Feb '09

21 Feb '09

Folks, A package containing PDF versions of Boost's documentation is now available for Boost-1.38.0 from the usual sourceforge download site: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=7586&package_id=15971… Please note that due to the diverse range of tools in use within Boost it has not been possible to produce PDF's for all of Boost's libraries, those currently included as PDF's are: accumulators any array asio bimap range complex-tr1 concepts config conversion date_time foreach function hash interprocess intrusive iterator math-gcd math mpi octonion optional phoenix program_options proto python_tutorial quaternion ref regex scope_exit signals static_assert string_algo thread tr1 tribool type_traits typeof units unordered variant xpressive Documentation for the following tools are also included in this package: bjam boost_build boostbook quickbook Regards, John Maddock.

1 0

[boost] Formal Review: Boost.RangeEx
by Thorsten Ottosen 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

Dear Developers and Users, It's my pleasure to announce that the review of Neil Groves' RangeEx library starts today and lasts until March 3, 2009. What is it? +++++++++++ The library provide two very useful extensions to the range library 1. Range-based algorithms. E.g. boost::sort( rng ); which is a convenient wrapper of instead of std::sort( boost::begin(rng), boost::end(rng) ); But the new interface also allows for more expressive code because (on the fly) composition of algorithms suddenly is possible. 2. Range adaptors. E.g. std::vector<int> vec = ...; boost::copy( vec | boost::adaptors::reversed, std::ostream_iterator<int>( std::cout ) ); where the expression "vec | boost::adaptors::reversed" wraps the iterators of the range on the left in reverse iterators. The library provides a wide range (no pun intended) of Range adaptors, and they are a powerful way to create ranges on the fly and pass them to algorithms. Getting the library +++++++++++++++++++ The library may be downloaded from http://www.cs.aau.dk/~nesotto/boost/range_ex.zip or from the Boost vault under "Algorithms". The docs may be browsed online here http://www.cs.aau.dk/~nesotto/boost/libs/range/ Please note that the documentation is integrated with the current Range ilbrary. Therefore the relevant sections for the review is http://www.cs.aau.dk/~nesotto/boost/libs/range/doc/adaptors.html and http://www.cs.aau.dk/~nesotto/boost/libs/range/doc/algorithms.html The code may be browsed here: http://www.cs.aau.dk/~nesotto/boost/boost/range/ Notice the library is header only (exception: the adaptor tokenized() depends on Boost.Regex). Writing a review ++++++++++++++++ If you feel this is an interesting library, then please submit your review to the developer list (preferably), or to the review manager. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: - What is your evaluation of the design? - What is your evaluation of the implementation? - What is your evaluation of the documentation? - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick - reading? In-depth study? - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Special considerations ++++++++++++++++++++++ Various RangeEx like libraries have been implemented in the past. You might want to compare with those libraries when you form your oppinion: 1. John Torjo's range lib http://rangelib.synesis.com.au/libs/boost-rangelib-20040913.zip http://torjo.com/rangelib/index.html 2. Adobe's ASL libraries include range-based algorithms: http://stlab.adobe.com/group__algorithm.html I'm looking forward to your review. best regards Thorsten, Review Manager _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

Boost 1.38.0 released
by Beman Dawes 10 Feb '09

10 Feb '09

Boost 1.38.0 has been released and is available from SourceForge. See http://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/ This release includes three new libraries: Flyweight, ScopeExit, and Swap. Updated Libraries: Accumulators, Any, Asio, Config, Date_Time, Exception, Filesystem, Graph, Hash, Interprocess, Intrusive, Lexical Cast, Math, Multi-index Containers, Proto, Regex, Thread, TR1, Type Traits, Unordered, and Xpressive. Other Changes: Experimental CMake build system. You can read the full release announcement here: http://www.boost.org/users/news/version_1_38_0 The release managers were Beman Dawes, Daniel James, Eric Niebler, and Rene Rivera. --Beman Dawes

1 0

Boost 1.38.0 beta 2 available
by Beman Dawes 30 Jan '09

30 Jan '09

Boost 1.38.0 beta 2 available is available from SourceForge. http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=7586&package_id=8041&… Please report any problems or comments to the users or developers mailing lists. ------------- Version 1.38.0 New Libraries * Flyweight: + Design pattern to manage large quantities of highly redundant objects, from Joaquín M López Muñoz. * ScopeExit: + Execute arbitrary code at scope exit, from Alexander Nasonov. * Swap: + Enhanced generic swap function, from Joseph Gauterin. Updated Libraries * Accumulators: + Add rolling_sum, rolling_count and rolling_mean accumulators. * Date_Time: + Added support for formatting and reading time durations longer than 24 hours with new formatter: %0. + Removed the testfrmwk.hpp file from the public include directory. + Fixed several bugs and compile errors. + For full details see the change history * Exception: + Improved and more customizable diagnostic_information output. * Hash: + boost/functional/detail/container_fwd.hpp has been moved to boost/detail/container_fwd.hpp. The current location is deprecated. + For more detail, see the library changelog. * Interprocess: + Updated documentation to show rvalue-references funcions instead of emulation functions. + More non-copyable classes are now movable. + Move-constructor and assignments now leave moved object in default-constructed state instead of just swapping contents. + Several bugfixes (#2391, #2431, #1390, #2570, #2528). * Intrusive: + New treap-based containers: treap, treap_set, treap_multiset. + Corrected compilation bug for Windows-based 64 bit compilers. + Corrected exception-safety bugs in container constructors. + Updated documentation to show rvalue-references funcions instead of emulation functions. * Math: + Added Johan Råde's optimised floating point classification routines. + Fixed code so that it compiles in GCC's -pedantic mode (bug report #1451). * Multi-index Containers: Some redundant type definitions have been deprecated. Consult the library release notes for further information. * Proto: + Fix problem with SFINAE of binary operators (Bug 2407). + Fix proto::call transform for callable transforms with >3 arguments. + result_of::value changed behavior for array-by-value terminals. + unpack_expr requires only Forward Sequences rather than Random Access Sequences. + Deprecate legacy undocumented BOOST_PROTO_DEFINE_(VARARG_)FUNCTION_TEMPLATE macros. + Add BOOST_PROTO_REPEAT and BOOST_PROTO_LOCAL_ITERATE macros to help with repetitive code generation + Support for nullary expressions with tag types other than proto::tag::terminal + Allow 0- and 1-argument variants of proto::or_ and proto::and_ * Regex: + Breaking change: empty expressions, and empty alternatives are now allowed when using the Perl regular expression syntax. This change has been added for Perl compatibility, when the new syntax_option_type no_empty_expressions is set then the old behaviour is preserved and empty expressions are prohibited. This is issue #1081. + Added support for Perl style ${n} expressions in format strings (issue #2556). + Added support for accessing the location of sub-expressions within the regular expression string (issue #2269). + Fixed compiler compatibility issues #2244, #2514, and #2458. * Unordered: + Use boost::swap. + Use a larger prime number list for selecting the number of buckets. + Use aligned storage to store the types. + Add support for C++0x initializer lists where they're available. + For more detail, see the library changelog. * Xpressive: + basic_regex gets nested syntax_option_flags and value_type typedef, for compatibility with std::basic_regex + Ported to Proto v4; Proto v2 at boost/xpressive/proto has been removed. + regex_error inherits from boost::exception Other Changes Experimental support for building Boost with CMake has been introduced in this version. For more details see the wiki, Discussion is taking place on the Boost-cmake mailing list. Compilers Tested Boost's primary test compilers are: * TODO * GCC 4.0.1 on OS X 10.4.10 and 10.5.2 on Intel and 10.4.9 on Power PC. * GCC 4.3.2 on Ubuntu Linux. * GCC 4.3.3 on Unstable Debian. * GCC 4.2.1 on HP-UX 64-bit. * HP C/aC++ B3910B A.06.17 on HP-UX 64-bit. * Visual C++ 7.1 SP1, 8.0 SP1 and 9.0 SP1 on Windows XP. Boost's additional test compilers include: * OS X: + GCC 4.0.1 on OS X 10.4.10 and 10.5.2 on Intel, OS X 10.4.9 on PowerPC + Intel 9.1, 10.0 on OS X 10.4.10 + Intel 10.1, 11.0 on OS X 10.5.2 * On Linux: + GCC 4.1.1, 4.2.1 on 64-bit Red Hat Enterprise Linux + GCC 4.1.2 on 64-bit Redhat Server 5.1 + GCC 3.4.3, GCC 4.0.1, GCC 4.2.4 and GCC 4.3.2 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux + GCC 4.3.2 with C++0x extensions + GCC 4.2.1 on OpenSuSE Linux + pgCC 8.0-0a 64-bit target on Red Hat Enterprise Linux + QLogic PathScale(TM) Compiler Suite: Version 3.1 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux * IBM XL C/C++ Enterprise Edition for AIX, V10.1.0.0, on AIX Version 5.3.0.40 * GCC 4.2.1 on FreeBSD 7. * GCC 4.2.1 on HP-UX Integrity * HP C/aC++ B3910B A.06.17 on HP-UX 64-bit. Acknowledgements TODO

1 0

[Review] UUID review results
by Hartmut Kaiser 12 Jan '09

12 Jan '09

Hi all, Some while ago we have had a lively discussion during the review of Andy Thompkin's UUID library. I counted 11 votes, 10 'yes' votes and one 'no' vote. IMHO the 'no' vote has been superseded by the followup discussion and all issues have been resolved. Almost all reviewers stated the UUID library to be very useful. Given the overwhelming number of 'yes' votes the UUID library is accepted for inclusion into Boost. Before inclusion into the Boost SVN Andy will need to fix a couple of minor issues as discussed during the review, some of which are: - POD-ness - lexical_cast - default construction Congratulations to Andy for his effort related to pushing the UUID library forward. I hope to see active development and maintenance of this library in the future. Regards Hartmut Review Manager

1 0

BoostCon 2009: Submission deadline extended
by Hartmut Kaiser 10 Jan '09

10 Jan '09

Hi all, The deadline for the submission of session proposals has been extended to January 20th, 2009. No further extensions will be granted. Please find below the original call for participation. Conference registration will be available at http://www.boostcon.com/registration. Regards Hartmut ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3rd annual Boost Conference 2009 Aspen CO, USA, May 3-9, 2009, www.boostcon.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Call for participation ---------------------- Promising to be the main face-to-face event for all things Boost (www.boost.org) BoostCon'09 opens the door to your C++ future. From using the Boost libraries to writing and maintaining them, from evangelizing to deploying Boost within your organization, from infrastructure and process to vision and mission, and from TR1 to TR2 and the new C++0x Standard, BoostCon brings together the sessions, the colleagues, and the inspiration to support your work with C++ and Boost in particular for the next year. To reflect the breadth of the Boost community, the conference includes sessions aimed at two constituencies: Boost end-users and hard-core Boost library and tool developers. The program fosters interaction and engagement within and across those two groups, with an emphasis on hands-on, participatory sessions. Session topics -------------- * Topics of interest include, but are not restricted to, the following: * General tutorial sessions introducing one or more Boost libraries * In-depth sessions on using specific libraries * Case studies on using Boost * Experts panels * Advanced sessions on implementation techniques used within Boost libraries * C++0x and how it will change life for users and library writers * TR1 and TR2 * Development workshops to extend or enhance existing Boost libraries * Workshops on design process * Infrastructure workshops such as Build tools, Website, Testing * Concepts and Generic Programming * Hardware and infrastructure presentations focused on how libraries can make better use of the technology * Other topics likely to be of great interest to Boost users and Developers. Interactive and collaborative sessions are encouraged, as this is the nature of both the on-line Boost community and the style of learning and participation that has proven most successful at such events. Sessions can be tutorial based, with an emphasis on interaction and participant involvement, or workshop based, whether hands-on programming or paper-based, discussion-driven collaborative work. Session formats --------------- Presentations ............. Presentations focus on a practitioner's ideas and experience with anything relevant to Boost and Boost users. Panels ...... Panels feature three or four people presenting their ideas and experiences relating to Boost's relevant, controversial, emerging, or unresolved issues. Panels may be conducted in several ways, such as comparative, analytic, or historic. Tutorials ......... Tutorials are sessions at which instructors teach conference participants specific Boost-relevant skills. Workshops ......... Workshops provide an active arena for advancements in Boost-relevant topics. Workshops provide the opportunity for experienced practitioners to develop new ideas about a topic of common interest and experience. Author's Corner Presentations ............................. These were introduced at BoostCon 2008, and were a great success. They are short (30 minute) sessions, focusing on tips on usage and design. In addition, we're looking to uncover the hidden design gems boost libraries. Tool Vendors Presentations .......................... We actively encourage tool vendors and ISP's to submit proposals for a special Tool Vendors Session Track aimed at products related to Boost and C++ (compilers, libraries, tools, etc.). Other formats may also be of interest. Don't hold back a proposal just because it doesn't fit into a pigeonhole. Submitting a proposal --------------------- Standard Sessions are 90 minutes. You may submit a proposal for fractions or multiples of 90-minutes. Fractional proposals will be grouped into 90 minute sessions covering related topics. Longer sessions, such as tutorials and classes, will be assigned 90 minute, three hour (i.e. half day), or six hour (i.e. full day) time slots. Please include: * The working title. * Type of session: presentation, panel, tutorial, workshop, authors corner, vendor track, other * A paragraph or two describing the topic covered, suitable for the conference web site * Proposed length: 10-20 minute short talks, 45 minutes, 90 minutes, half-day, full day * Alternate lengths, if you are willing to make adjustments: 10-20 minute lightning-talks, 45 minutes, 90 minutes, half-day, full day * Audience: users, developers, both * Level: basic, intermediate, advanced * A biography, suitable for the conference web site * Your contact information (will not be made public) Submission details ------------------ All submissions have to be done through the EasyChair conference management system: http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=boostcon09. If you have not already registered at EasyChair, you will need to do so in order to submit your proposal. All submissions will go through a peer review process. Authors are invited to submit PDF versions of full papers of up to 10 pages in ACM conference proceedings format (see http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates) The full papers are not required unless you want them published in the proceedings. All accepted papers will be made available in the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Digital Library (approval pending). Best papers, after further reviews, will be considered to be book chapters or journal articles in a renowned journal. The session materials go on the BoostCon CD handed out to attendees. For general information on the BoostCon 2009 paper submission or the scope of technical papers solicited, please refer to the conference website at www.boostcon.com. For any other questions about the submission process or paper format, please contact the Program Committee at boostcon09(a)easychair.com. If you have any technical problems with EasyChair, please contact EasyChair for help. Note: Presenters must agree to grant a non-exclusive perpetual license to publish submitted materials, either electronically or in print, in any media related to BoostCon. Important dates --------------- Proposals for submissions due: January 20th 2009. Proposals acceptances sent (tentative program available): February 10th, 2009 Fully scheduled program available: March 1st, 2009 Session materials due: April 1st 2009. Hartmut Kaiser, email: hartmut.kaiser(a)gmail.com (Program Committee Chair) David Abrahams, email: dave(a)boostpro.com (Conference Chair) On behalf of the conference organizers

1 0

[boost] Futures Review Starts Today - January 5, 2009
by Tom Brinkman 06 Jan '09

06 Jan '09

Futures Review Starts Today - January 5, 2009 Braddock Gaskill http://braddock.com/~braddock/future Anthony Williams http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk/files/n2561_future.hpp Please review one or both libraries for submission to boost. Apparently, Anthony Williams' submission has also been sumbitted the C++ standards committee. Status unknown. As always, here are some questions you might want to answer in your review(s): What is your evaluation of the design(s)? What is your evaluation of the implementation(s)? What is your evaluation of the documentation? What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library(s)? Did you try to use the library? With what compiler(s)? Did you have any problems? How much effort did you put into your evaluation(s)? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? Do you think the libraries should be accepted into Boost as-is or should they be merged? Apparently, there has been various discussions about these two libraries last six months. The authors will need to bring us up to date as to why they want their libraries to be reviewed seperately. Also, each author should evaluate each others library and point out the differences in their implentations. These will serve as useful discussion points. The ideal outcome in my mind would be a resubmitted submission, incorporating the best ideas from each. Tell me if you share this view or what is your preferred result. As always, your reviews will certainly assist the authors in improving their libraries even further. Thank you in advance. Please feel free to participate in any discussion even if your not going to provide a full review. Review Manager Tom Brinkman _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0