- Boost-users - lists.boost.org

how to generate PDF formate documentations of Boost?
by easior 23 Jul '17

23 Jul '17

Hi, all in the list. I plan to build boost documentation in pdf format for latest version of boost. However, it's no luck to me even following the link: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_40_0/doc/html/boostbook/getting/started.html. I can only find HTML formatted documentation for boost. I don't know what about the relationship between boost and doxygen. I also have no idea about the mechanism of the boostbook. Any suggection? Thanks in advance, Easior Lars

4 4

Boost Regex - Alternation documentation example
by Nick 21 Jul '17

21 Jul '17

According to the Boost Regex documentation for Alternation (http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_64_0/libs/regex/doc/html/boost_regex/syntax…) Quoting a piece of the documentation: ----- |abc is not a valid expression, but (?:)|abc is and is equivalent, also the expression: (?:abc)?? has exactly the same effect. ----- Is the last expression: (?:abc)?? correct? Why does it need two '?' operators instead of only one? If I try this expression with the input "abc" the Boost engine does not match "abc" as I'd have expected. However the expression: (?:abc)? matches as expected. Nick

2 2

MS controlled email domains - not going to work
by Michael Caisse 20 Jul '17

20 Jul '17

The irony in sending this message is that the people who need to see it probably wont get it. We are having trouble with hotmail.com, live.com, msn.com, and outlook.com. Microsoft is filtering the dedicated IP address used by the mail lists and most recently has responded with: Not qualified for mitigation [ip address] Our investigation has determined that the above IP(s) do not qualify for mitigation. These IP(s) have previously received mitigations from deliverability support, and have failed to maintain patterns within our guidelines, so they are ineligible for additional mitigation at this time. We have tried to explain multiple times that the IP address has a new owner but we seem to be stuck in almost an auto-response loop. We will continue to try and get service unblocked; however, I would recommend that you dump your MS controlled accounts for Boost mail lists and use another service. michael -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com

2 1

[review][beast] Beast Review Results
by Michael Caisse 20 Jul '17

20 Jul '17

In an effort to get you all to just read this announcement sequentially, I will start with the result: Beast is ACCEPTED into Boost without conditions The entire community is served when the Boost review process works well and I would like to personally thank each of you who took your valuable time and worked to make Boost better. We had 21 formal reviews submitted from a demographic that included both seasoned participants and first-time reviewers. It is gratifying to have such participation for what some might see as a niche library. * Thank you Vinnie for your effort to assemble a high-quality package for review and for your responsiveness on the mail-lists. GitHub, and Slack. * Thank you to the individuals that submitted their first Boost review. * Thank you to the veteran contributors and authors for continuing to devote energy to the community. I found the discussion surrounding the library beneficial and I know that Vinnie walked away with actionable items to improve Beast. -------------------- The Stats: -------------------- While the review process is not exactly tallying up votes and casting a verdict, we can gain some insight of the general, gross-scale opinion of the library. Official reviews were received from: Reviewer Accept | Reject ------------------------------------------ * Zach Laine : X * Nik Bougalis : X * Artyom Beilis : X * Peter Dimov : X * Klemens Morgenstern : X * Glen Fernades : X * Marcel Ebmer : X * Scott Determan : X * Stanislav Karchebnyy : X * Michael Larson : X * Vadim Zeitlin : X * Jared Wyles : X * Niall Douglas : X * Barrett Adair : X * Gyorgy Szekely : X * Daniela Engert : X * Jens Weller : X * Phil Endecott : X * Bjorn Reese : X * Rüdiger Berlich : X * Christopher Kohlhoff : X Most of the reviewers agreed on the inclusion of Beast into Boost and at the same time that Beast isn't a great name for the library. (Just say Boost.Beast 10-times-fast). Vinnie has a FAQ item discussing the name and his continuing use is deliberate. He has heard the petitions to change and weighed them. -------------------- Concerns: -------------------- A variety of concerns and comments were made during the review. An impressive number of items were addressed in code or documentation during the review period itself. Some of the stated concern for rejection included: * Too many templates * Run-time polymorphism / OO would be better. * Library scope is too small and provides no real value to users - This is clearly one of those value judgements and for some users the not-in-scope nature of Beast made the feature set not compelling enough to use or have as a Boost library. Other users spent time converting existing projects to use Beast. This included projects previously running POCO, libcurl, and homegrown solutions. Beast has existing commercial and open-source users. The library clearly meets the needs of some users. * Premature optimization * Security concerns * Poor support for HTTP chunking - Vinnie proposed and then later made changes addressing the chunking concerns. Unfortunately, the reviewer with the complaint did not respond to multiple requests for feedback. * Licensing - Four files have dual licenses (BSL and another). Boost's legal counsel is reviewing the situation and we hope to have guidance by the end of this week. I have not placed a condition on the acceptance of Beast based on the legal feedback because Vinnie knows licensing issues must be remedied before the repository is merged into Boost. -------------------- The Upsides: -------------------- There were lots of great things said about the Beast package. Some of these include: * Great documentation * High quality implementation. * Thorough test suites * Already being used by commercial entities and others * Lots of successful real-life conversions of existing clients/servers * Extremely responsive developer (do you sleep Vinnie?) -------------------- An Author as much as a Library: -------------------- Accepting a library into Boost is also accepting an author. Boost authors have enormous latitude in the control and modifications of their libraries. Vinnie has shown dedication to addressing issues, listening to constructive input, making changes when appropriate, and protecting his vision of what the Beast is. I believe Vinnie will serve the community well as a contributor. -------------------- Final Thoughts: -------------------- Reviews are hard. It is hard to have your work torn apart and remain considerate. It is hard to repeat answers to previously asked questions. It is hard to explain specific use-cases and why it is important a library supports them. It is difficult to critique a large body of work. It is hard to stick with conversations to make overall improvements. I was impressed with the participants in the review. We are all opinionated and passionate -- likely a prerequisite to being part of the Boost community. Thank you all for making Boost better. I'm looking forward to seeing additional libraries and application built with Beast. -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com

2 2

Re: [Boost-users] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
by Oliver Kowalke 20 Jul '17

20 Jul '17

I'm one of the maintainers of the CMake Boost support ( https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/blob/master/Modules/FindBoost.cmake Roger, can Cmake be used for boost.context? Especially this library required to know the architecture, ABI, binary format, address model ... in order to select the right assembler?

3 3

Boost 1.65.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 2
by Marshall Clow 19 Jul '17

19 Jul '17

The second release candidates for the 1.65.0 beta release are now available at: https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.65.0.beta.1/source/boost_1_65_0_beta… https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.65.0.beta.1/source/boost_1_65_0_beta… https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.65.0.beta.1/source/boost_1_65_0_beta… https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.65.0.beta.1/source/boost_1_65_0_beta… The SHA256 checksums are as follows: d54d29568c4e4933cbfe40a292b6cb84a7f68121e34f6a83f7d0f7c652b6b2d8 boost_1_65_0_beta1_rc2.7z 092676557513e992347d30dd0cd058fb8af2a401e5da4f4413f5b577852d726b boost_1_65_0_beta1_rc2.tar.bz2 31fa3c807e2205e18f7d5c74f77f540677f7b0937af1e37f595c137e1e87bf84 boost_1_65_0_beta1_rc2.tar.gz 83c8d8b76fa9591572226a1a49fd191d76db3011b52b907cbbc8d37d46213bd2 boost_1_65_0_beta1_rc2.zip This RC contains a single fix to the stacktrace library. As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. Thanks! -- The release managers

7 10

CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
by Jon Kalb 18 Jul '17

18 Jul '17

The libraries produced by the Boost community have had a greater impact on the way that the C++ community writes code than any other library implementation. The focus of the Boost community will always be on the libraries, but it is undeniable that we are dependent on and often limited by the infrastructure of our trade. Years ago, the move to Git was contentious; yet, it was required to improve development. In a similar vein our build system has become an impediment for many developers and users, existing and prospective. Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting users and developers. We understand that the actual process of achieving the end goal will be long, time consuming, and not without its share of conflict. We also recognize that the Boost community is comprised of bright and passionate individuals that are eager to get involved and help get work done. The members of the Steering Committee have been encouraged by the discussions and activity surrounding CMake on the mailing lists over the years and know that many people have voiced visions. We hope that each of you rejoins the discussion to support this initiative and contributes to the common goal of improving Boost’s integration into the broader C++ ecosystem. For the Boost Steering Committee, Jon Kalb, Chair jonkalb(a)boost.org

8 7

Re: [Boost-users] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
by Oliver Kowalke 18 Jul '17

18 Jul '17

Cmake file for boost.context is missing support for segmented stack (split-stack), valgrind ...? Is the Cmake port is not complete?

1 0

Boost 1.65.0 Beta 1
by Marshall Clow 17 Jul '17

17 Jul '17

Boost release 1.65.0 beta 1 is now available at: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.65.0.beta.1/source/> The SHA256 checksums are as follows: d54d29568c4e4933cbfe40a292b6cb84a7f68121e34f6a83f7d0f7c652b6b2d8 boost_1_65_0_beta1.7z 092676557513e992347d30dd0cd058fb8af2a401e5da4f4413f5b577852d726b boost_1_65_0_beta1.tar.bz2 31fa3c807e2205e18f7d5c74f77f540677f7b0937af1e37f595c137e1e87bf84 boost_1_65_0_beta1.tar.gz 83c8d8b76fa9591572226a1a49fd191d76db3011b52b907cbbc8d37d46213bd2 boost_1_65_0_beta1.zip Please download the beta, give it a try, and report any problems you encounter. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

5 5

Boost Regex Back Reference Issue
by Nick 14 Jul '17

14 Jul '17

According to the Boost documentation for Back references (http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_64_0/libs/regex/doc/html/boost_regex/syntax…) which seems to be the same at least from 1.37 - 1.64. Quoting a piece of the documentation: ----- For example the expression: ^(a*).*\1$ Will match the string: aaabbaaa But not the string: aaabba ----- I'm finding two issues with the example cited. 1. It seems to me that the example of the string which should not match, should actually match. Ultimately, shouldn't the engine match the marked sub-expression with the first 'a' in order to satisfy the backreference? I tested this example with Oniguruma and with PHP's PCRE and they both matched the string noted here to not match. But also, since the marked sub-expression is (a*) then I wonder what the behavior would be if it couldn't make a match on 'a', since the '*' will allow for zero matches. In fact, it seems like everything in the pattern is effectively "optional" due to the '*' operator. I'm a novice with Perl, but unless I made a mistake, it will match unconditionally: print "It matches\n" if "aaabba" =~ /^(a*).*\1$/; It matches print "It matches\n" if "aaabbac" =~ /^(a*).*\1$/; It matches print "It matches\n" if "" =~ /^(a*).*\1$/; It matches print "It matches\n" if "x" =~ /^(a*).*\1$/; It matches print "It matches\n" if "xyz" =~ /^(a*).*\1$/; It matches print "It matches\n" if "123" =~ /^(a*).*\1$/; It matches 2. The other issue is that when I try this example with the string which is posted to not match, the Boost regex engine runs for a while and ultimately crashes with a memory error. (seems like it might be an endless loop of some sort). Is that a bug? Nick

3 4