June 2005 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Cache
by Maksym Motornyy 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

Hi all, I found that last discussion about cache classes in Boost was in year 2002. What happend at the end? Do we have cache in Boost or not? Sincerely, Maksym.

1 0

RE: [boost] Re: Re: Typeof: Review result
by Brian Braatz 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of Jonathan Turkanis > I'm one of those people who feels I must put a lot of work into a review. > For > the FSM review I broke this policy and wrote a review even though I had > only > studied the documentation. My review was negative; it was basically a list > of > what I considered to be shortcomings of the library. > > I ended up getting into an unpleasant exchange with the library author, > who > repeatedly challenged me to suggest concrete changes to the design to fix > the > perceived problems. I had examined the library more thoroughly, my guess > is that > I would have been able to suggest improvements. I don't blame the library > author > in this case; it's only natural to ask for an alternate design when you > are told > that your design is flawed; however, I simply didn't have sufficient time > to > devote to the library. [Brian Braatz Writes:] What are the expectations here? I find myself in this spot frequently. I see something up for review, and it ALWAYS happens at the worst time for me. I look at it, but I tend to not say much unless I can REALLY devote the time needed to give the library the proper amount of review time. There might be "no answer" to the expectations questions. But I would be curious how others feel about this. I.e. If I only have an hour or two to look at something- is it still useful for me to submit a review? Part of the problem I have is an enormous respect for what a boost library is. It is not something one slaps together just to get their name in lights (to me at least). A boost library makes you go "Wow". if it doesn't make you go "Wow" it doesn't belong in boost. But if I cannot devote the time needed to review something DEEPLY, I feel it is somewhat disrespectful for me to participate. Do you guys think I am wrong to feel this way? Or do you find the opinions of a quick review valuable? Brian

5 6

Internationalization
by Maksym Motornyy 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

Hello all, Is there any i18n library available (pending) in Boost? Sincerely, Maksym.

3 4

STLport builds
by Valentin Samko 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

I've been trying to build Boost.Thread and a number of other libraries for use in the software in the company where I work, and was only stopped by a number of STLport related problems. We already use header-only boost libraries for many years, and now would like to start using other boost libs. The main problems are: 1. We use unchecked STLport variant (i.e. without __STL_DEBUG). Unfortunately, Boost is not compatible with this mode, although a fix to add this mode is only a few lines of code in boost build. When I added this mode and recompiled boost, everything ran without any noticeable problems. I think it is worth adding this mode to boost build so that developers wouldn't have to patch boost build to add this mode. 2. It is very usefull that compiled boost libraries embed version number and different compile time options in their names. Unfortunately, STLport version is not embedded in their names (only 'p'). This creates a problem where two executables compiled against different STLport versions try to use the same Boost.WhateverLibrary dll. Are there any reasons not to embed STLport version number into boost library names? 3. A separate issue with Boost.Threads, where _sntprintf is called in boost_error in read_write_mutex.cpp, even when building with STLport, which does not have _snprintf. Also, there is bug in boost_error, which wrongly assumes that _sntprintf zero terminates the resulting string. I also wrote a patch to fix this problem. Is there any way to merge it into Boost.Thread? I understand that we could solve these problems either by not using STLport, or by changing the way we use it, but unfortunately, this is next to impossible for us, as we have a large software suite which is built and supported this way for years. Also, I think other developers would benefit if Boost provided workarounds/solutions for these common STLport problems. -- Valentin Samko http://val.samko.info

3 3

RE: [boost] Re: Kinook is using boost
by Brian Braatz 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

HAHAHAh When I clicked on the link earlier I was thinking the same thing. >From what I could gather on their web page- this is a commercial app that is closed source. > -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of Robert Ramey > Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 6:46 PM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: [boost] Re: Kinook is using boost > > Hmmm - any chance it could build the boost libraries and run the tests? > > Robert Ramey > > Kyle Alons wrote: > > Kinook Software (http://www.kinook.com) uses Boost in the following > > products: > > > > Product: Visual Build Professional > > Description: Visual Build Pro is a tool that enables developers, > > software process engineers, and build specialists to create an > > automated, repeatable process for building their software. Visual > > Build provides built-in support for Microsoft Visual Studio .NET and > > 2005, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Visual J++, SourceSafe, eMbedded > > Tools, Borland Delphi, JBuilder, C++Builder, and more. > > Parts of Boost used: any, mem_fn, regex, shared_ptr, smart_ptr, > > static_assert > > Web site: http://www.visualbuild.com/ > > > > Product: Ultra Recall > > Description: Ultra Recall is a personal information management (PIM) / > > knowledge management (KM) application for Microsoft Windows. It helps > > you capture, organize, and recall all of your electronic information > > across all the applications that you use. > > Parts of Boost used: format, shared_ptr, static_assert > > Web site: http://www.ultrarecall.com/ > > > > Thanks. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

Kinook is using boost
by Kyle Alons 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

Kinook Software (http://www.kinook.com) uses Boost in the following products: Product: Visual Build Professional Description: Visual Build Pro is a tool that enables developers, software process engineers, and build specialists to create an automated, repeatable process for building their software. Visual Build provides built-in support for Microsoft Visual Studio .NET and 2005, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Visual J++, SourceSafe, eMbedded Tools, Borland Delphi, JBuilder, C++Builder, and more. Parts of Boost used: any, mem_fn, regex, shared_ptr, smart_ptr, static_assert Web site: http://www.visualbuild.com/ Product: Ultra Recall Description: Ultra Recall is a personal information management (PIM) / knowledge management (KM) application for Microsoft Windows. It helps you capture, organize, and recall all of your electronic information across all the applications that you use. Parts of Boost used: format, shared_ptr, static_assert Web site: http://www.ultrarecall.com/ Thanks. -- Kyle Alons Kinook Software, Inc. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

RE: [boost] Re: [function types] Formal Review begins today.
by Brian Braatz 08 Jun '05

08 Jun '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of Jody Hagins > Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:49 AM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: Re: [boost] Re: [function types] Formal Review begins today. > > > > Seems like we have a fundamentally different taste when it comes to > > documentation... [Jody Hagins Writes:] > > Probably. > [Brian Braatz Writes:] Allow me to suggest 2 ways of thinking about library documentation: 1- The better the documentation is, and the more it speaks to the average user, the more usage the library will have. If the docs don't make sense, people will SKIP using the lib. (which is a shame) 2- The lower the skills required of the reader the better. I realize one can only do so much in documentation. I am simply stating that the simpler and more understandable the docs are the better. This is because the "skilled" folks can skip the intro if it is obvious. I believe: "Brilliance is a mastery of the obvious" <*>>> and documentation should seek to brilliantly expose the obvious over complicated subjects.

3 2

RE: [boost] Re: [function types] Formal Review begins today.
by Brian Braatz 07 Jun '05

07 Jun '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of David Abrahams > > > > "Brilliance is a mastery of the obvious" <*>>> and documentation should > > seek to brilliantly expose the obvious over complicated subjects. > [David Abrahams Writes:] > Another thing: the author of documentation should (usually) disqualify > him- or herself from making judgements about understandability and > especially approachability. The problem is that once you understand > it, it's very hard to see the places where it fails to communicate to > someone who doesn't. [Brian Braatz Writes:] :) " The problem is that once you understand > it, it's very hard to see the places where it fails to communicate to > someone who doesn't." A RESOUNDING YES!!!!!!- And thank you David. This sentence is worthy of printing out and hanging on my wall. Or maybe I should make tee-shirts and hand them out at conferences. Or better yet, I could have stickers made and hand those out. Then anytime someone sees some documentation that fails to make sense to normal humans, they can slap the sticker on it and hand it back to the author.

1 0

boost cvs build failure: Unknown suffix
by Neal Becker 07 Jun '05

07 Jun '05

PYTHON_ROOT=/usr PYTHON_VERSION=2.4 bjam -sTOOLS=gcc stage Building Boost.Regex with the optional Unicode/ICU support disabled. Please refer to the Boost.Regex documentation for more information (and if you don't know what ICU is then you probably don't need it). Unknown suffix on <@boost!libs!iostreams!build><<<<<<< - see UserObject rule in Jamfile(5).

1 1

[cvs] waiting for lock
by Pedro Lamarão 07 Jun '05

07 Jun '05

TortoiseCVS, while trying to update a working copy, has been telling me for more than an hour that it's "waiting for david_abrahams's lock in /cvsroot/boost/boost/libs/preprocessor/doc/headers/control". I'm not sure what that means besides me being currently incapable of cvs update. I'll keep trying for a while. -- Pedro Lamarão Desenvolvimento Intersix Technologies S.A. SP: (55 11 3803-9300) RJ: (55 21 3852-3240) www.intersix.com.br Your Security is our Business

2 2