- Boost-users - lists.boost.org

RE: [Boost-users] Re: MultiArray questions
by Ben Hutchings 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Dr Mark H Phillips <mark(a)austrics.com.au> wrote: > On Sun, 2004-01-25 at 04:47, garcia wrote: <snip> > > >Why can't you change the != into <? Ie, do: > > > > > > for(index i = 0; i < 3; ++i) > > > for(index j = 0; j < 4; ++j) > > > for(index k = 0; k < 2; ++k) > > > A[i][j][k] = values++; > > > > > >or can you? This would be more efficient I should think, and > > >requiring that index types be ordered shouldn't be too onerous > > >should it? > > > > > You can change the != into a < if you like. I don't see any > > good reason why one should be more efficient than the other. I > > personally use != because it more closely matches how I write > > for loops using iterators. > > So in short, that's a matter of personal preference. > > I would have thought < was more efficient. Isn't "i != j" > implemented, at machine level, more or less by "i > j || i < j". > So one compare would be cheaper than two. Or have I got this > wrong? <snip> A test for i != j typically compiles to an instruction sequence like: CISC: RISC: CMP j,i LD r1,i BEQ test_failed LD r2,j SUB. r0,r1,r2 BEQ test_failed (CMP is a subtraction which doesn't store its result but sets condition flags. BEQ is branch-if-equal. RISC processors need to have all arithmetic operands in registers, but generally they have a lot of registers so the variables may well be in registers already, making the LDs unnecessary.) A test for i < j (assuming i and j are unsigned) would be like: CISC: RISC: CMP i,j LD r1,i BCC test_failed LD r2,j SUB. r0,r2,r1 BCC test_failed (BCC is branch-if-carry-flag-clear. Order of arguments varies between assembly languages, so don't worry too much about that.) These instruction sequences usually have identical timing properties (the exact time taken depends on caching and branch prediction). Theoretically, an architecture which had a combined comparison and conditional branch could make != a little faster since it requires only bitwise comparison whereas < requires carrying between bits (longer signal propagation time). However, the world is moving away from such architectures - even x86 processors are designed to make the simple instructions run fast, not the complex ones. For a generic algorithm that uses iterators, comparing with < requires that the iterators be random-access. If this isn't essential to the algorithm, it would be better to use !=. So it's a good habit to use i != j as the loop condition if i can definitely never be greater than j.

2 1

Using boost::shared_ptr<> with G++'s -fno-rtti
by Jonathan Lennox 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Is it possible to use boost::shared_ptr<> without RTTI being enabled? I'm trying to port some code to the Sharp Zaurus, and its GUI libraries are all compiled with the G++ flags -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti. Boost seems to support the former flag just fine, but has problems with the latter: g++ -g -O2 -Wall -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions -o sipua/main.o -c ../sipua/main.cpp In file included from ../libcine/boost/shared_ptr.hpp:27, from ../rtplib++/rtptypes.h:8, from ../rtplib++/rtpsession.h:14, from ../sipua/radio.h:11, from ../sipua/main.cpp:18: ../libcine/boost/detail/shared_count.hpp: In member function `virtual void* boost::detail::sp_counted_base_impl<P, D>::get_deleter(const std::type_info&)': ../libcine/boost/detail/shared_count.hpp:267: error: cannot use typeid with -fno-rtti In file included from ../rtplib++/rtptypes.h:8, from ../rtplib++/rtpsession.h:14, from ../sipua/radio.h:11, from ../sipua/main.cpp:18: ../libcine/boost/shared_ptr.hpp: In function `D* boost::get_deleter(const boost::shared_ptr&)': ../libcine/boost/shared_ptr.hpp:431: error: cannot use typeid with -fno-rtti What is the typeid call in the get_deleter functions doing? Is there any way to work around or disable this? Thanks. -- Jonathan Lennox lennox at cs dot columbia.edu

2 2

Disabling synchronization in Boost.Thread
by Aaron W. LaFramboise 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

Hi, Is there some easy way to disable all of the synchronization primatives in Boost.Thread, or in other words, make them all no-ops? I have written some generic code to be used in both singlethreaded and multithreaded environments, and it would be convenient for me to simply be able to 'switch off' synchronization when I know that I am in a singlethreaded environment, without having to uglify my code with ifdef's or similar. Simply disabling threads in Boost seems to cause synchronization primatives to fail to compile at all. Aaron

3 2

Re: MultiArray questions
by garcia 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

Dr Mark H Phillips <mark(a)austrics.com.au> wrote: >Hi, > >I've recently found out about the existence of MultiArray and I >am quite impressed! I was thinking of implementing something >similar myself but now hopefully I don't have to! However I have >a few questions that I'm hoping someone can answer. > > > Hi Mark. Thank you for the compliments on MultiArray. I hope that it meets your needs, and if not, I hope I can be of some service. >Question 1 >---------- > >In the user documentation there is an example which has >some example code: > > for(index i = 0; i != 3; ++i) > for(index j = 0; j != 4; ++j) > for(index k = 0; k != 2; ++k) > A[i][j][k] = values++; > >Why can't you change the != into <? Ie, do: > > for(index i = 0; i < 3; ++i) > for(index j = 0; j < 4; ++j) > for(index k = 0; k < 2; ++k) > A[i][j][k] = values++; > >or can you? This would be more efficient I should think, and >requiring that index types be ordered shouldn't be too onerous >should it? > > > You can change the != into a < if you like. I don't see any good reason why one should be more efficient than the other. I personally use != because it more closely matches how I write for loops using iterators. So in short, that's a matter of personal preference. >Question 2 >---------- > >If I use the built-in "no-frills" C array type to represent a >2-dimensional array in row-major order, then I would access >an element (i, j) by doing: > > a[ &a[0] + i*n + j ] > >where a is my m by n array. And if I wish to traverse a, in >row-major order, I can do: > > for (int* ip=&(a[0]); ip<&(a[n*m]); ip+=n) { > for (int* ijp=&(ip[0]); ijp<&(ip[n]); ++ijp) { > visit(ijp); > } > } > >These are a very efficient ways of doing things, but it lacks >somewhat in ease-of-generalization and in readbility. This is where >the MultiArray library is useful. But do I lose in efficiency by >going to MultiArray? Ie, in the simple case where base is 0, stride >is 1, and when we traverse in row-major order, is the MultiArray >library smart enough to do compile-time optimizations to generate >code which is as efficient as the above? > > > The MultiArray implementation doesn't currently do anything special for the case that the base is 0. I'm in the midst of doing some performance analysis on the library, and so far, to be honest, it looks like there is a performance hit. I'm investigating what is happening, and I hope to translate my findings into performance improvements. I would liket hose to be available by May of this year. >Is it possible to construct a new >multi_array/multi_array_ref/const_multi_array_ref from an array_view >by doing a deep copy of the view? > >A view is a nice way of looking at different parts of a MultiArray >object in a readable way, but sometimes you might wish to turn this >view into a more-efficiently represented object. Is this easy to do >in the MultiArray library? > > It is my intention that a new multi_array be constructible from an existing view, but on looking back through my code and test cases, the library does not currently support it. This is an oversight on my part. I hope to have this functionality available in CVS by the end of this coming week (which coincides with the end of the month). I'm afraid that the functionality won't make the upcoming Boost release however. >Question 4 >---------- > >Sometimes you might have an object starts off being mostly >accessed in row-major order, so you want a representation which works >efficiently for this use. But down the track you might wish to change >to mostly column-major access. Does MultiArray provide easy ways to >transform from one underlying representation to another? > > > There is no direct means to change the underlying representation of an existing array. The layout of an array is determined at construction. You can however assign a row-major multi_array to a column-major multi_array. >Thanks, > > > My pleasure. Thank you for your questions and comments. Incidentally, I am now subscribed to Boost-Users. I apologize for any discussion I have missed or inaccessibility resulting from my absence. Cheers, ron

2 1

Interfacing the .pyd with other .dll
by Shukla, Nitin (Export) 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

Hello, I am trying to build an application where my Python/C interface dynamic library (built using boost) is to call on function in another (windows) dll file containing the C function. I am using the 'bjam' tool to build the my Python/C interface (.pyd) file built it is giving me error. The C source file (which calls the function in another dll and used by boost to build the python/C interface ".pyd" files) gets compiled to generate the object file but linker fails to built the respective ".lib" and ".pyd" files as it doesn't get to link to the dll file defining a C function. I am fairly new to using bjam tool and my jamfile is a simple one. It looks like this: # Specify our location in the boost project hierarchy subproject libs/python/example/tutorial/nitin ; # Include definitions needed for Python modules import python ; extension world # Declare a Python extension called hello : main.cpp # source <dll>../../../build/boost_python # dependencies ; I do not know how can I specify bjam to compile and link with other dll for build the ".pyd" and ".lib" file. Can anyone help me how can I specify this in my jam file? It will be usefully for me if some one can tell where I can get documentation on writing jam files. I am using WinPython 2.3.2. I have built boost on Windows 2000 using MinGW compilers. Thanks in advance, Nitin

2 1

Test library fails to link on OS X 10.3 Panther
by Pierre-Michel Tremblay 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

Scott Lamb! I have the exact same set up as you have and I end up with the same error message as you do. Same as your earlier message: I've downloaded boost-1.30.2 and boost-jam-3.1.7 to my PowerBook running Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther). After installing boost-jam without problems, I'm attempting to build the boost test library as follows: $ uname -a Darwin spiff.local 7.2.0 Darwin Kernel Version 7.2.0: Thu Dec 11 16:20:23 PST 2003; root:xnu/xnu-517.3.7.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc $ gcc_select Current default compiler: gcc version 3.3 20030304 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 1495) $ cd boost-1.30.2/libs/test/build $ bjam -sTOOLS=darwin ----- Same errors as you: ...failed darwin-Link-DyLib-action libs/test/build/bin/libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib/darwin/debug/ runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/ libboost_prg_exec_monitor.dylib... ... ...failed darwin-Link-DyLib-action libs/test/build/bin/libboost_test_exec_monitor.dylib/darwin/debug/ runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/ libboost_test_exec_monitor.dylib... ... ...failed darwin-Link-DyLib-action libs/test/build/bin/libboost_unit_test_framework.dylib/darwin/debug/ runtime-link-static/shared-linkable-true/ libboost_unit_test_framework.dylib... ... ...failed updating 6 targets... ...updated 283 targets... Have you or anyone successfully resolved the problem? Thanks. PM

1 0

compilation problem with property_map?
by lr 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

hello all, i was wondering if anyone could help me with this compilation error. gcc indicates that the error is in put(), specifically it cannot match the operator for [bool&] on property_map.hpp:316. the full output is included below. the origin of the error is caused in destructor code (when objects get out of scope in testgdlgraph.cpp). if i need to supply more information about the code i am writing let me know. i am hesitant because it is fairly complicated, as i am having trouble trying to replicate this problem in a simple example. thanks leonid ps. boost rocks, keep up the good work! the compiler error: /usr/include/boost/property_map.hpp: In function `void boost::put(const boost::put_get_helper<Reference, PropertyMap>&, K, const V&) [with PropertyMap = boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*&, void*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag>, Reference = ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*&, K = bool, V = const ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*]': testgdlgraph.cpp:1488: instantiated from `void boost::put(Property, boost::adj_list_helper<Config, Base>&, const Key&, const Value&) [with Config = boost::detail::adj_list_gen<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>, boost::listS, boost::setS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>::config, Base = boost::bidirectional_graph_helper_with_property<boost::detail::adj_list_gen<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, st1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>, boost::listS, boost::setS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>::config>, Property = ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, Key = bool, Value = const ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*]' testgdlgraph.cpp:533: instantiated from `boost::graph_traits<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS> >::edge_descriptor ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::add_edge(boost::graph_traits<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS> >::vertex_descriptor&, boost::graph_traits<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS> >::vertex_descriptor&) [with parameter_t = par_t, domain_value_t = dv_t, sr_element_t = test1()::ser_t]' testgdlgraph.cpp:104: instantiated from here /usr/include/boost/property_map.hpp:316: no match for `const boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*&, void*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag>& [bool&]' operator /usr/include/boost/graph/detail/adjacency_list.hpp:2383: candidates are: Ref boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<Directed, Value, Ref, Vertex, Property, Tag>::operator[](boost::detail::edge_desc_impl<Directed, Vertex>) const [with Directed = boost::bidirectional_tag, Value = ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, Ref = ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*&, Vertex = void*, Property = boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, Tag = ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag] /usr/include/boost/property_map.hpp: In function `void boost::put(const boost::put_get_helper<Reference, PropertyMap>&, K, const V&) [with PropertyMap = boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*&, void*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag>, Reference = const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*&, K = bool, V = const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*]': testgdlgraph.cpp:1488: instantiated from `void boost::put(Property, boost::adj_list_helper<Config, Base>&, const Key&, const Value&) [with Config = boost::detail::adj_list_gen<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>, boost::listS, boost::setS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>::config, Base = boost::bidirectional_graph_helper_with_property<boost::detail::adj_list_gen<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, st1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>, boost::listS, boost::setS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS>::config>, Property = ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, Key = bool, Value = const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*]' testgdlgraph.cpp:537: instantiated from `boost::graph_traits<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS> >::edge_descriptor ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::add_edge(boost::graph_traits<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS> >::vertex_descriptor&, boost::graph_traits<boost::adjacency_list<boost::setS, boost::listS, boost::bidirectionalS, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_vertex_vertex_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex::GDL_vertex_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, ngdl::GDLvertex<parameter_t, domain_value_t, sr_element_t>::domain_map_type*, boost::no_property> >, boost::no_property, boost::listS> >::vertex_descriptor&) [with parameter_t = par_t, domain_value_t = dv_t, sr_element_t = test1()::ser_t]' testgdlgraph.cpp:104: instantiated from here /usr/include/boost/property_map.hpp:316: no match for `const boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<boost::bidirectional_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*&, void*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag>& [bool&]' operator /usr/include/boost/graph/detail/adjacency_list.hpp:2383: candidates are: Ref boost::adj_list_edge_property_map<Directed, Value, Ref, Vertex, Property, Tag>::operator[](boost::detail::edge_desc_impl<Directed, Vertex>) const [with Directed = boost::bidirectional_tag, Value = const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, Ref = const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*&, Vertex = void*, Property = boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_table_tag, ngdl::GDLtable<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>*, boost::property<ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag, const ngdl::domain_map<par_t, dv_t>*, boost::no_property> >, Tag = ngdl::GDLgraph<par_t, dv_t, test1()::ser_t>::GDL_edge_domain_map_tag] make[2]: *** [testgdlgraph.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [check-am] Error 2 make: *** [check-recursive] Error 1

2 1

vector_indexing_suite issue
by Jeff Holle 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

I am successfully using vector_indexing_suite in following code: class_<std::vector >("vector_B") .def(vector_indexing_suite<std::vector >()) ; However, I find that it requires that the B class conforms to the Equality Comparable concept where the STL standard only demands it to conform to the Assignable concept. I'm wondering if this is necessary, and if so how the operator== method should be coded. Can it simply always return true or false? Or compare "this" pointers?

2 1

CVS head build problem
by Jeff Holle 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

I downloaded the boost CVS head this morning and in attempting a re-build it, I found that my compiler, gcc v3.3, choked on the parmeter "-Wno-long-double". This problem was solved by changing line 61 of boost/tools/build/v1/gcc-tools.jam to: flags gcc CFLAGS : ; Suspect this wasn't a proper changed, but it worked for me.

2 1

boost::mpl:: operators ...power metafunction?
by Andy Little 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

Hi, I am implementing the mpl math operators for my physical_quantities type. Ideally I would like to declare a boost::mpl::power<A,B> metafunction. I would like to do: typedef Power_type<...> P ; pq_xx a; boost::mpl::power< pq_xx, P >::type b = run_time_power( a); OTOH: boost::mpl::power< P, pq_xx >::type b = run_time_power( a); (param order ... TBD) I am assuming it is ok to specialise plus, minus, multiplies etc in the boost::mpl namespace? I could of course put power (or whatever name) outside the boost::mpl namespace but that is not ideal. Any thoughts? regards Andy Little

2 2