January 2004 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] Re: 1.31.0 Release candidate 2 available - some nitpicks
by Reece Dunn 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Joel de Guzman wrote: >Pavel Vozenilek wrote: >>2. Spirit 1.8 docs: each line in code snippets is appended >> by empty line. Seems as CSS problem (unless its feature). > >Hmmm... which code snippets? I can't find them. I have had a look at the docs. For example, libs/spirit/doc/scanner.html has the following code snippet: template< typename IteratorT = char const*, typename PoliciesT = scanner_policies<> > class scanner; The problem is in the html sources where every line is folloowed by a blank line, e.g.: <html> <head> <title>The Scanner and Parsing</title> ... -- this seems to be a problem with the HTML code generator. Regards, Reece _________________________________________________________________ Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger

10 14

bjam docs for boost developers?
by Jeremy Siek 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Hi All, Are there bjam docs for boost developers that explain how to write a Jamfile in the style of the Jamfiles in the existing boost libraries? I already know about: http://www.boost.org/tools/build/jam_src/index.html but that doesn't cover stuff like "run" and "compile" and "link-fail". -Jeremy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- Jeremy Siek http://php.indiana.edu/~jsiek/ Ph.D. Student, Indiana Univ. B'ton email: jsiek(a)osl.iu.edu C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org) office phone: (812) 856-1820 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------

4 6

boost_1_31_0_rc2 link check results
by Neal D. Becker 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

LinkChecker 1.10.3 Copyright ?2000-2004 Bastian Kleineidam LinkChecker comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY! This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. Look at the file `LICENSE' within this distribution. Get the newest version at http://linkchecker.sourceforge.net/ Write comments and bugs to calvin(a)users.sourceforge.net Start checking at 2004-01-29 09:11:04-004 URL http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt Name www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt Parent URL file:///usr/local/src/boost_1_31_0_rc2/index.htm, line 465, col 21 Real URL http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt Check Time 0.253 seconds Result Error: 404 Not Found Thats it. 1 error in 129 links found Stopped checking at 2004-01-29 09:11:19-004 ( 14.760 seconds)

1 0

RE: [boost] Re: Re: Boost.Thread : IO multiplexing
by Hurd, Matthew 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

> On Behalf Of Sean Kelly > Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Re: Boost.Thread : IO multiplexing > > IOCP works for both file and socket operations. Perhaps not a poll > method but I'm not much interested in the low-end solutions anyway. Small point. Please don't knock the pollster ;-) Polling trades CPU for latency gain. Polling is a high end solution for low latency requirements, which covers a lot of my issues (not the psychological ones though ;-)). Not so good for high throughput systems, but it can be. A combined approach, poll for a while you can then wait for an interrupt ( a bit like spin-locks ), can be especially beneficial for supercomputer oriented frameworks as plenty of research shows. A polling, single threaded architecture is often best for the style of performance oriented apps I develop. I have also seen some neat SAN software developed with polling that wouldn't have otherwise worked at all well. Regards, Matt Hurd. IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

3 2

Index.html for 1.31.0 and spirit
by Russell Hind 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Is the index.html complete for 1.31.0? I think something could be mentioned for spirit as to what version it is now, and also the fact that it nolonger supports bcc32 compilers just to give people a warning that they are best to stick with 1.30.2 if they use spirit and borland compilers. (Or replace the spirit directory with the one from 1.30.2) Cheers Russell

3 3

[1.31 RC2, format] BCB problem
by Pavel Vozenilek 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Borland C++ 6, patch 4, format_implementation.hpp: template< class Ch, class Tr> basic_format<Ch, Tr>& basic_format<Ch, Tr>:: operator= (const basic_format& x) { if(this == &x) return *this; (basic_format(x)).swap(*this); <<<=== here it fails return *this; } [C++ Error] format_implementation.hpp(93): E2102 Cannot use template 'basic_format<Ch,Tr>' without specifying specialization parameters Adding template parameters helped here: (basic_format<Ch, Tr>(x)).swap(*this); /Pavel

3 2

Re: [boost] Re: Re: Boost.Thread : IO multiplexing
by Roland 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

(Michael Glassford <glassfordm(a)hotmail.com>) wrote: > Sean Kelly wrote: > > I'm not sure that much if anything would need to be done to provide > > support for IO multiplexing in Boost. ... > That, of course, would be the best solution. Have you looked at the > code in the orignal post to see if such a solution would solve his > problem? > ... > > I guess the question > > becomes, is there a need for such an IO library in Boost? The > nature > > of the project would demand a good bit of custom code for each > > platform, which isn't typical of Boost components. I have been off for a few days now, and I like to see that I have arrived at the very same conclusions than you. 1) I believe now that most likely everything can be done with boost.thread as is (question still is performance) 2) I used an approach as 1 thread / WFMO instead beeing able to directly wait on condvars _and_ IO simulateneously. (Altough this approach isn't easily portable, as it contains a lot of platform dependencies. Also this approach does not scale very well for the multiplexing case since WMFO/select scenarios are limited in the number of waitable things. This is where IO completion should enter the scene.) 3) I agree that the real question should be whether there should be a such an IO library in boost. Personally I would vote for such a thing, perhaps based on already existing "C" async_io libs, much like the pthreads lib. If anyone is interseted I could try to post my files, but I am not sure where I should post them since they are more a bit of example appliaction code than library code. Would the boost files area be adequate? Roland

4 9

Re: [boost] 1.31.0 Release candidate 2 available
by Jeremy Siek 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

Hi Beman, On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Beman Dawes wrote: bdawes> Good catch! adj-matrix-graph2.gif, subgraph.gif, and bdawes> undir-adj-matrix-graph2.gif are checked in a regular rather than binary bdawes> files. bdawes> bdawes> Jeremy? Ok, I think I got those fixed. Also, I fixed the bad figure references in adjacency_list.html and adjacency_matrix.html. Cheers, Jeremy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeremy Siek http://php.indiana.edu/~jsiek/ Ph.D. Student, Indiana Univ. B'ton email: jsiek(a)osl.iu.edu C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org) office phone: (812) 856-1820 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: [boost] Boost.Thread request: event object
by Hurd, Matthew 29 Jan '04

29 Jan '04

> On Behalf Of Daryle Walker > Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Thread request: event object > > >> > >> if( lock const& l = lock(guard,t)) > > > > I like this last one, though I suspect I'll end up with > > > > if (lock lk(guard,t)) > > > > in my code as it will be the first thing I'll think of. > [TRUNCATE] > > Did you see my last message in this thread? I said that the rules of C++ > _FORBID_ creation of multiple objects and/or use of the constructor call > syntax when using object creation with the condition of an "if" or > "while". > The single object syntax with "=" is the only one allowed. > > -- > Daryle Walker Quite right. My sloppiness. Thanks Daryle. Matt Hurd. IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

1 0

The quick_allocator not-a-memory-leak
by Darren Cook 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

I've a class using the boost quick_allocator like this: class Chain{ //... void* operator new(std::size_t sz){ return boost::detail::quick_allocator<Chain>::alloc(sz); } void operator delete(void *p,std::size_t sz){ boost::detail::quick_allocator<Chain>::dealloc(p,sz); } //... }; I've started using valgrind ( http://valgrind.kde.org/ ) to look for memory problems in my unit tests and it is complaining that the memory is never released. Now I understand this: // "Listen to me carefully: there is no memory leak" // -- Scott Meyers, Eff C++ 2nd Ed Item 10 But is there some function I can call at the end of my program to: a) confirm I've called dealloc() for every alloc() and that the next pointer is currently at start b) release the memory. Valgrind supports suppressing the complaint but the check of deallocs matches allocs would be a useful test anyway. Darren

2 2