- Boost-users - lists.boost.org

nowide
by Colin Humphries 30 Dec '14

30 Dec '14

Hello Artyom, Please provide wifstream and wofstream constructors. I realise this request may seem contrary to the spirit of your very useful library but wide streams are required by boost::serialize to output to XML (i.e. UTF-8) (Yes, I agree it might be more sensible to update Boost::Serialize). Regards, Colin Humphries

1 0

[filesystem] ISO TS 18822, Technical Specification - File System
by Beman Dawes 30 Dec '14

30 Dec '14

The filesystem TS has been unanimously approved by ISO. 32 countries voted. The document has been forwarded to the ISO Central Secretariat for publication. The current working draft, which is technically the same as the TS but may have editorial corrections, is available at http://cplusplus.github.io/filesystem-ts/working-draft.html Many thanks to all the Boost folks who contributed so much to the Boost library that became the ISO TS! The C++ standards committee Filesystem Study Group will continue to operate, and will issue further TSes as further proposals dictate, and will continue to publish a working paper as issues for the TS are corrected. Happy Boost New Year, --Beman

1 0

[Serialize] Conflict between Serialize and PIMPL?
by Merrill Cornish 29 Dec '14

29 Dec '14

In a normal PIMPL structure, the visible class is responsible for instantiating the private implementation class when the visible class is instantiated. However, when serialization is restoring objects, /it/ thinks it is responsible for instantiating all classes, including the private implementation classes of a PIMPL structure. Who wins? Do I end up with /two/ instances of the private implementation class, one of which is just hanging in mid-air? If you need a more solid background, here is what I'm doing: _Visible class header_: struct Foo_Private; class Foo { public: Foo(); . . ./other//stuff/ . . . . . . /data member-free serialization//code/ . . . private: *const std::unique_ptr< Foo_Private() > d_ptr**;* }; _Visible class code_: Foo::Foo() : *d_ptr(std::make_unique< Foo_Private >())* {...code to initialize Foo_Private data members...} _Private Implementation class header_: struct Foo_Private{ Foo_Private(); . . . /data member declarations/ . . . . . . /data member serialization code/ . . . }; Private implementation class has no code file. It is a header-only class. One alternative I thought of was to /not/ serialize the private implementation class, even though it contains all of the data member that need serializing. Instead, if the private class has data members, say, bar and baz, then the /visible/ class would have a serialize() function that "reached into" the private object using its d_ptr: template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive & ar, const unsigned int version) { ar & d_ptr->bar; ar & d_ptr->baz; } So, the visible class (which has no data members of its own) is serialized using data extracted from/inserted into the private class object. Would serialization-by-proxy work?

2 1

Can't build Boost::atomic
by Rui Pacheco 29 Dec '14

29 Dec '14

I've extracted a number of Boost's sub projects as source into my project using bcp. I've set CMake to find the Boost library under my project and not the one installed on my system:https://gist.github.com/ruipacheco/bae9f6694f5760da90b2 <https://gist.github.com/ruipacheco/bae9f6694f5760da90b2> I'm now trying to build my project but Boost::atomic fails while trying to find a file that indeed has not been extracted: https://gist.github.com/ruipacheco/954d0cf0dbb8ece7db75 <https://gist.github.com/ruipacheco/954d0cf0dbb8ece7db75> Is there a pre-processing step I missed with Boost when extracting the libraries? Why is it referencing a file that doesn't exist? -- Rui Pacheco

1 0

[boost-users][boost/numeric/ublas/matrix.hpp]: How to use SQL query to create boost matrix?
by It neophyte 29 Dec '14

29 Dec '14

Dear all I've read some matrix documentation (see below) and did not experience any difficulty in compiling codes: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_42_0/libs/numeric/ublas/doc/matrix.htm However I am using SQL API to query data from c++, and wondering how I can build a boost price matrix. *Ps*: table contains 3 columns: name (*string* type), date (*datetime* type), price (*double* type) 1/While retrieving the query data, my screen output is as follows: aaaaa 2014-12-22 30.1 aaaaa 2014-12-21 27.7 bbbbb 2014-12-22 13.2 bbbbb 2014-12-21 10.3 ccccc 2014-12-22 80.4 ccccc 2014-12-21 79.9 2/My aim is to create a following price matrix (here 2 by 3) as: 30.1 13.2 80.4 27.7 10.3 79.9 Thanks in advance and Regards

1 0

[Test] Calling BOOST_MESSAGE too early results in malformed xml output from Boost.Test
by Martin Ba 26 Dec '14

26 Dec '14

Hi! First, I'm on 1.44 and won't get around to test it on a newer version any time soon, so I'll just throw it in anyway: I've hit the case that when the executable running boost.test is calling BOOST_MESSAGE from a BOOST_GLOBAL_FIXTURE, the message is generated *before* the unit test runner is full initialized (the message "Running ## test cases..." is displayed *after* the Message). When writing xml output, this means that the `<Message>`is generated before the `<TestLog>` root, resulting in malformed xml. I can fix this quite easily on my side, since I've [customized my logger anyway][1], I'll just have to make sure unit_test_log_formatter::log_start is always called first for the xml case, but it's still a buggy thing imho. cheers, Martin [1] : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/26505229/how-to-log-boost-test-output-to…

2 3

[Serialize] How to serialize a class with NO serializable data
by Merrill Cornish 26 Dec '14

26 Dec '14

I applied the PIMPL idiom to one of my larger classes, and it worked great. The visible class records the API with public functions and NO data member except the pointer to the implementation class. That pointer should not be serialized because it is created automatically when the visible class is instantiated. However, if I put NO serialization code in the visible class, the visible class won't (as I understand it) be instantiated when the archive is loaded. (I'm still far away from the point where I can try the archive load for myself.) Should I define the serialize<> function for the class, but with an empty body, since there are no data members to be saved?

2 1

Re: [Boost-users] [boost] [core] [addressof.hpp] [addressof_test2.cpp] ISO C++ says that these are ambiguous
by Sergey Sprogis 26 Dec '14

26 Dec '14

Peter Dimov wrote: > That's probably because of the __SUNPRO_CC workaround at addressof.hpp line 110: > #if (defined( __BORLANDC__ ) && BOOST_WORKAROUND( __BORLANDC__, > BOOST_TESTED_AT( 0x610 ) ) ) || defined( __SUNPRO_CC ) > return boost::detail::addressof_impl<T>::f( v, 0 ); > #else > return boost::detail::addressof_impl<T>::f( > boost::detail::addr_impl_ref<T>( v ), 0 ); > #endif .... Thanks Peter, Exactly, this is the reason for addressof_test2.cpp test's failure with Oracle Studio 12.4 compiler. The only issue here is that there is 5 months old opened bug with proposed fix to cure this: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/10311 I'd really appreciate it if someone will pay attention to this bug, and will insert proposed simple 1 line fix in trunk area. Thanks, Sergey

1 0

[TEST] Tests registered manually never exectued....
by Witold E Wolski 24 Dec '14

24 Dec '14

Im trying to manually register unit tests following the example at : http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_57_0/libs/test/doc/html/utf/user-guide/test… My registration code looks like follows: boost::unit_test::test_suite* init_unit_test_suite(int argc, char* argv[]) { boost::unit_test::test_suite* ts2 = BOOST_TEST_SUITE("test_suite2"); ts2->add(BOOST_TEST_CASE(&liveViewTest)); ts2->add(BOOST_TEST_CASE(&checkImageFormats)); ts2->add(BOOST_TEST_CASE(&testRethrowException)); boost::unit_test::framework::master_test_suite().add(ts2); return 0; } The init_unit_test_suite function is entered and returns but non of the added tests is ever exectued. regards -- Witold Eryk Wolski

2 1

[boost] [compute] Review period extended till December 30 + sum up
by Antony Polukhin 23 Dec '14

23 Dec '14

Hi, Review period of Compute library extended till December 30. Some notes and answers to them that were pointed out during review so far: * Some of the algorithms could be tuned for a specific hardware - Library author is working on a auto-tuning solution and improves existing algos * Why OpenCL C API used instead of C++ API? - C++ API had issues, C API allows a bit more control. No C++ API for OpenCL 2.0 * API is not N4105 compatible, library is not N*** compatible - This could be easily fixed by a library that will use Compute as a backend * Some of the algorithms return futures while other work with command queues - This is because of the OpenCL design + async chains/futures would be probably added later * Not all the types of the Khronos API are supported - A few types are not documented yet, there's a patch in the works which would allow the Khronos C++ types to be passed into Compute algorithms * A few type related errors could be detected at compile time - This will be fixed, more asserts would be added to runtime only checkable places. Report issues to the tracker https://github.com/kylelutz/compute/issues * On small data sets CPU algorithm would work faster than a GPGPU. How about implicitly dispatching algo on CPU in those cases? - The call on whether to execute the algorithm should be left up to the user. While library author agrees that this would be a useful feature, he just don't think Compute is the right place for that logic. * How about providing way to do chains of async operations - This is a big task that will be solved some day. * How about providing Boost.ASIO like error handling via throw and error_code - Implementing an approach like ASIO's wouldn't be that difficult. Thanks to all the reviewers for spending their time and providing useful comments so far! -- Best regards, Antony Polukhin

1 0