March 2018 - Boost-users - lists.boost.org

[Interval] Help debugging compiler optimization
by Tim van Erven 12 Mar '18

12 Mar '18

Dear all, I am trying to understand why I am getting different numerical results with the interval library depending on the optimization level of the compiler. I am attaching the smallest example I have been able to create: # On my Mac laptop Apple LLVM version 9.0.0 (clang-900.0.39.2) boost 1.66 (installed via homebrew) $ g++ foo.cpp -o foo $ ./foo third1 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 third2 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 v1 = (0.9999999999999998889776975374843459576368331909179687500000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) v2 = (0.9999999999999998889776975374843459576368331909179687500000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) $ g++ -O2 foo.cpp -o foo $ ./foo third1 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 third2 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 v1 = (1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) v2 = (1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) I would expect to get the same output in both cases, but the lower end-points are different in the second case, and seem wrong to me since third2 * 3.0 < 1.0. # On my Linux machine the effect is different: gcc version 5.4.0 20160609 boost 1.58 on Ubuntu 16.04.9 $ g++ foo.cpp -o foo $ ./foo third1 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 third2 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 v1 = (0.9999999999999998889776975374843459576368331909179687500000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) v2 = (0.9999999999999998889776975374843459576368331909179687500000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) $ g++ -O2 foo.cpp -o foo $ ./foo third1 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 third2 = 0.3333333333333333148296162562473909929394721984863281250000000000 v1 = (0.9999999999999998889776975374843459576368331909179687500000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) v2 = (1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) Can anyone explain what is going on? Thanks in advance, Tim -- Tim van Erven<tim(a)timvanerven.nl> www.timvanerven.nl

7 14

[Boost.Serialization] (De-)serialization with class versioning
by Lars Ruoff 11 Mar '18

11 Mar '18

Hi, i use the class versioning feature of Boost.Serialization, with an external (non-intrusive) serialization function like this: BOOST_CLASS_VERSION(GAMEINFO, 1) template <typename Archive> void serialize(Archive &ar, GAMEINFO& gameSettings, const unsigned int version) { ar & gameSettings.NPODS; // ... if (version > 0) ar & gameSettings.ARENA_GOAL_EXCLUSION_RADIUS; } Now as soon, as i set BOOST_CLASS_VERSION(GAMEINFO, 1), i get version==1 in this serialize function, even when i *deserialize* (load from archive). I would have expected to get the version of the data in the saved archive in this case. Say i saved with an old version=0. Then my class evolved and i set BOOST_CLASS_VERSION(GAMEINFO, 1). But when reading the old archive, i expect version==0 in the function so i can react on it. Instead, i get always version==1, as soon as i compile with BOOST_CLASS_VERSION(GAMEINFO, 1), even when i'm reading old files! What am i missing? regards, Lars R.

3 7

boost::serialization - Non intrusive serialization of user-defined members?
by Lars Ruoff 05 Mar '18

05 Mar '18

Hi, I have a class structure like class MemberClass; class ContainerClass { MemberClass special_member; int other_members; }; Following the example in http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_66_0/libs/serialization/doc/ i want to write a non-intrusive serialization: template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive & ar, ContainerClass & c, const unsigned int version) { ar & c.other_members; // easy - built-in type serialize(ar, c.special_member, version); //use same version??? } Assuming there's is also a non-intrusive void serialize(Archive & ar, MemberClass & m, const unsigned int version); this compiles and works but i feel this is not the way to do it because it reuses the version number of the container class for the member class? So how to handle that? Must the Container class manage version of its members individually? I suggest to add a section "Non-intrusively Serializable Members" to documentation with an example. Cheers, Lars R.

3 7

[fiber] Fiber context switching during stack unwinding...
by Oliver Seiler 01 Mar '18

01 Mar '18

(Hopefully I'm not writing an essay for something that is a gcc/libstdc++/Linux bug) I've been using Boost.Context for a number of years now, to do something similar to what Boost.Fiber does. We recently upgraded our development target environment to Debian 9 (gcc 6.3), and moved up to Boost 1.62.0, so I've been looking at Boost.Fiber to replace how we're using Boost.Context (because it looks like it could greatly simplify our code, among other things). One thing I ran into with Boost.Context was that it interacted in some interesting ways with exception handling, and I haven't really seen any discussion about it. Specifically, switching contexts with an active exception (so during stack unwinding, or in a catch block) would result in weird behaviour in the other context (std::uncaught_exception() returning true, std::current_exception() returning the exception from the other context, try/catches in the new context causing new problems when switching back to the original context which is in the middle of stack unwinding, etc). I chalked that up to limitations of the context switching, though I haven't seen any mention of avoiding context switches with active exceptions; presumably this is some interaction with gcc's exception implementation, and would maybe need support from libunwind to save/restore the exception state (I don't recall if I checked if clang produced similar results, though I'll probably give it a go when I have the chance). So I wasn't surprised when I ran into similar problems with Boost.Fiber. I am wondering why this aspect of usage isn't discussed in any of the documentation; it would be nice if these libraries could work well with language features like exceptions, but I understand that the language spec doesn't really speak to the stack switching happening under-the-hood. It actually wouldn't surprise me that this wasn't even a problem in all environments, and just happens to be an artifact of the Linux implementation, but then we're either talking about unspecified or undefined behaviour, but would be nice to know. Even in the documents going through the C++ standards committee I don't see much mention of how things like coroutines should interact with something like std::current_exception() (perhaps because it is assumed to "just work" and doesn't need additional comment?) Anyone else ever run into issues related to this? Seems like any use of RAII for exception handling would easily run into problems. Mostly I've just found ways to work around it (e.g., not allowing the context switch if std::uncaught_exception() or std::current_exception() indicate it would be unsafe to do so, typically by throwing another exception) but this tends to make libraries harder to use correctly (e.g., can't really allow context switching in a destructor, or in a function called from a destructor, etc). Cheers Oliver

3 4

why boost does not have skip list implementation?
by David Frank 01 Mar '18

01 Mar '18

like java concurrentSkipListSet for example. Thanks, David

1 0