September 2004 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Re:Re: [boost] Re: serialization - build shared libs
by Robert Ramey 20 Oct '04

20 Oct '04

Martin Ecker wrote: >Neal Becker wrote: >> Is this perhaps a MS-windows specific problem? I did build a shared lib >> (using scons, I haven't learned jam yet), and AFAICT it is working, on >> Linux. >I'm pretty sure you will also run into problems with shared objects >under Linux. The problem is that certain global variables (e.g. for >the type registry) are defined as static member variables in header >files. Under Windows, if two different DLLs include this header file, >you will get two different copies of that static member variable - one >in each DLL - although there should only be one. Maybe the linker >under Linux is smart enough to resolve such issues. >Have you tried to serialize a class defined in one shared object > (which is registered in the type registry via BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT) from >code in another shared object? That's when you might run into >problems. You definitely will under Windows. >You might also run into problems when you dynamically (i.e. explicitly >in your code via dlopen) load a shared object, which contains classes >that use BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT to register themselves. Again, under >Windows you definitely will. I think there is a little confusion here about what it means to build the serialization library as a Shared Library or DLL. a) if you mean creating libraries which contain exactly the same functionality as libboost_serialiation.lib and libboost_wseralization.lib then there should be no problem as far as I know. Note that you might have problems if you loading/unloading the shared libraries multiple times under program control. I'm not sure. I haven't tested this and have left it for latter. Mainly this is because it should use the ABI autolink to be line with other boost libraries and work better for users. b) if you creating DLLS which instantiate serialization templates for specific classes - then you most likely have problems. There are still some issues pending. Martin has jumped ahead and addressed these issues for his application and most of his additions will likely eventually find their way into the serialization library in some form. Robert Ramey

4 16

patch to build boost on dragonflybsd
by Patrick Mauritz 19 Oct '04

19 Oct '04

the attached patch makes it possible to build boost on dragonflybsd with gcc3.4. the change in boost/python/detail/config.hpp is necessary as dfly doesn't provide the gcc-patched headers that "fix" offsetof(). if defined(freebsd)&&!defined(dragonfly) is in there as dfly sometimes defines both of them. after this patch, everything except boost::serialize (which complains about lack of wchar_t) should build. patrick mauritz

2 1

file modes in boost cvs
by Neal Becker 16 Oct '04

16 Oct '04

I noticed that in boost cvs files seem to have random modes. Many sources show up as executable when checked out of cvs onto my Linux box. Hopefully this will be fixed before release.

4 3

mpl apply_if.hpp question
by Robert Ramey 14 Oct '04

14 Oct '04

Would someone have a fit if something like this were added to boost/mpl ? Robert Ramey //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- // boost/mpl/apply_if.hpp header file // See http://www.boost.org for updates, documentation, and revision history. //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- // // Copyright (c) 2004 // Robert Ramey // // Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute and sell this software // and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee, // provided that the above copyright notice appears in all copies and // that both the copyright notice and this permission notice appear in // supporting documentation. No representations are made about the // suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided "as is" // without express or implied warranty. // apply_if is deprecated. Use eval_if instead. This is only included // to support older code like spirit 1.6 #ifndef BOOST_MPL_APPLY_IF_HPP_INCLUDED #define BOOST_MPL_APPLY_IF_HPP_INCLUDED #include "boost/mpl/eval_if.hpp" namespace boost { namespace mpl { template< typename C , typename F1 , typename F2 > struct apply_if { typedef BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME eval_if<C,F1,F2>::type type; }; // (almost) copy & paste in order to save one more // recursively nested template instantiation to user template< bool C , typename F1 , typename F2 > struct apply_if_c { typedef BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME eval_if_c<C,F1,F2>::type type; }; } // namespace mpl } // namespace boost #endif // BOOST_MPL_APPLY_IF_HPP_INCLUDED

6 17

Mpl Set
by Jaap Suter 13 Oct '04

13 Oct '04

Hi, I noticed that there is a boost/mpl/set directory with some files in them (CVS from circa one week ago). Is this work-in-progress or can I actually start using it in some way? Do you need any help in writing these? I'm in dire need for a compile time set. Regards, Jaap Suter

3 3

Review of Daryle Walker's "More IO" library begins today, August 21, 2004.
by tom brinkman 12 Oct '04

12 Oct '04

The review of Daryle Walker's "More IO" library begins today, August 21, 2004. Download: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/more_io_4.zip [or] http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/more_io_4.zip Description: Provides a multitude of I/O-oriented extensions. Some are extra manipulators; variants of "std::endl", a resetting manipulator, and a configurable manipulator. The library includes a set of base class templates for wrapping a new stream-buffer type around a stream class. Changes from the last interim version (called "more_io_3b.zip"): * split the manipulator header into several headers * refined the license statements in some already-affected files Changes from the first formal review (called "more_io.zip"): * refined the interface and implementation of array-streams and stream-buffer wrappers (including a wrapping example) * added the null-stream, value-stream, and pointer-stream headers * added generalizations to the new-line and skip-line manipulators * added the non-oriented 'reset' and 'form' manipulators * split the manipulator header into several headers * changed the license statements Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: What is your evaluation of the design? What is your evaluation of the implementation? What is your evaluation of the documentation? What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. For information about submitting a Formal Review, see http://www.boost.org/more/formal_review_process.htm The Review manager is: Tom Brinkman reportbase(a)yahoo.com

9 56

boost-Testing mailing list
by David Abrahams 11 Oct '04

11 Oct '04

I've lost track of who wanted this mailing list, but I now have the admin password. Someone else should volunteer to administrate the list, so contact me privately and we can go from there. Regards, -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com

3 4

[review] Formal review of the Smart Container library starts today
by Pavol Droba 09 Oct '04

09 Oct '04

Hi all, The review of the Smart Container library, written by Thorsten Ottosen starts today (September 26th, 2004) and runs for 10 days (until October 5th, 2004). The latest version of the library can be found at http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/smart_container.zip or http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/pointer%20container/smart_contain… The package contains all you need to sucessfuly use the library with the Boost version 1.31 or later, however library tests require the latest Boost.Test, that is available from the main Boost CVS. What does the library provide? The library documentation states: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whenever a programmer wants to have a container of pointers to heap-allocated objects, there is usually only one exception-safe way: to make a container of smart pointers like boost::shared_ptr. This approach is suboptimal if 1. the stored objects are not shared, but owned exclusively, or 2. the overhead implied by smart pointers is inappropriate This library therefore provides standard-like containers that are for storing heap-allocated or cloned objects (or in case of a map, the mapped object must be a heap-allocated or cloned object). For each of the standard containers there is a smart container equivalent that takes ownership of the objects in an exception safe manner. In this respect the library is intended to solve the so-called polymorphic class problem. The advantages of smart containers are 1. Exception-safe and fool proof pointer storage and manipulation. 2. Notational convenience compared to the use of containers of pointers. 3. Can be used for types that are neither Assignable nor Copy Constructible. 4. No memory-overhead as containers of smart pointers can have (see 11 and 12). 5. Usually faster than using containers of smart pointers (see 11 and 12). 6. The interface is slightly changed towards the domain of pointers instead of relying on the normal value-based interface. For example, now it is possible for pop_back() to return the removed element. The disadvantages are 1. Less flexible than containers of smart pointers <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< As an example of how the new containers look like, consider that <code> typedef boost::shared_ptr<Foo> foo_ptr; std::vector<foo_ptr> vec; vec.push_back( foo_ptr( new Foo ) ); (*vec.begin())->bar(); </code> now becomes <code> boost::ptr_vector<Foo> vec; vec.push_back( new Foo ); vec.begin()->bar(); </code> In your reviews, please include the answers for the following questions: * What is your evaluation of the design? * What is your evaluation of the implementation? * What is your evaluation of the documentation? * What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? * Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? * How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? * Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And finally, every review should answer this question: * Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Also, in the documentation you will find questions from the submitter to the reviewer; whenever you feel you have something to contribute on these issues, please don't hessitate to include that in your review. Thank you, Pavol Droba, review manager for the Smart Containers library.

13 57

Re: JavaScript index?
by Jonathan Turkanis 05 Oct '04

05 Oct '04

"David Abrahams" <dave(a)boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:uvfdwx3pm.fsf@boost-consulting.com... > > As long as we're tweaking the BoostBook look-and-feel, I'd like to > know the status of the "portable JavaScript index tree" project we > were discussing recently. I've even forgotten who was working on it > (shame on me). That would be me. :-) The docs are here: http://tinyurl.com/6tdvy. It's essentially finished, except for two points: 1. If it's integrated into Boost.Book, the documentation can be self-synchronizing, eliminating most need for the [link to this page] button. I think Reece Dunne did some work in this direction. 2. I'm planning to write a perl script which will make documentation writtenwith the tree control self-synchronizing even if it's not generated by Boost.Book. To understand what I mean by synchronization, see http://tinyurl.com/49hwe. Also note that the docs look better when the boost logo appears directly over the table of contents, as it does here: http://tinyurl.com/3p79x. Best Regards, Jonathan

9 22

RE: [boost] Proper threading (Was: Formal review of "Output Forma tters" library beginstoday )
by Rozental, Gennadiy 04 Oct '04

04 Oct '04

> Rozental, Gennadiy wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would like to start with resolution. I vote NOT to accept this > > submission. > > Gentlemen, may I ask that you use mailers which preserve > correct threading? In > particular, in review of the outfmt library, each message > from Reece, Robert > and Gennadiy is completely unrelated to the thread, missing > the "References" > and "In-reply-to" headers. > > This makes follow the thread a nightmare. Even web-based > mailers nowdays > support proper threading. What do you do to break it? I use Outlook. In some cases it preserve "threading". In some not. Gennadiy.

9 12