August 2008 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Visual Studio 2008 SP1 released
by Michael Marcin 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

Contains many nice fixes and enhancements including their own version of boost::swap. http://blogs.msdn.com/vcblog/archive/2008/08/11/visual-studio-2008-service-… http://blogs.msdn.com/vcblog/archive/2008/08/11/tr1-fixes-in-vc9-sp1.aspx Thanks, Michael Marcin

3 2

Re: [boost] [unnullable_ptr] Proposal for a new library
by Alp Mestan 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

Hi, Sorry, had many things to do. I'm having many errors when trying to compile the Test file you've put with the header. Here are some of the errors : http://rafb.net/p/TGP3FO40.html PS : I've renamed the header and put it in the boost include dir. -- Alp Mestan --- http://blog.mestan.fr/ --- http://alp.developpez.com/ --- In charge of the Qt, Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence sections on Developpez

2 8

[review] FSM Review Starts Today August 11th
by Martin Vuille 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

The formal review for Andrey Semashev's Finite State Machines (FSM) library begins today and will run until the 20th. The documentation (overview and reference) is available online: http://boost-extension.redshoelace.com/docs/boost/fsm/doc/state_machine.html http://boost-extension.redshoelace.com/docs/boost/fsm/doc/reference.html The current submission is available from the sandbox vault at http://tinyurl.com/yjozfn (or http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=FSM.zip &directory=&PHPSESSID=48493076c1ea60ae316f7b60f15b9ed1, if you prefer.) There has already been some discussion of the library since the rewiew was first announced: http://www.nabble.com/FSM-Review-Announcement-to18820219.html http://www.nabble.com/FSM-Review-Reminder-to18890305.html ----------- Description ----------- "The main goals of the library are: * Simplicity. It should be very simple to create state machine using this library. * Performance. The state machine infrastructure should not be very time and memory-consuming in order to be applicable in more use cases. * Extensibility. A developer may want to add more states to the existing state machine, and this addition should be relatively safe since it shouldn't interfere with the existing states. The developer should also be able to specify additional transitions and events for the machine with minimum modifications to the existing code." "Boost.FSM vs. Boost.Statechart There is another library in Boost that provides similar functionality: Boost.Statechart. Although it currently covers almost all major Boost.FSM features and provides ones that are not supported in this library, Boost.Statechart is more targeted to creation of big and complex state machines with possibility of distributed development. But this does not come at no price and Statechart has little tools for compile-time programming and does not provide as much run-time performance as Boost.FSM does. So there are main guidelines for users to make a decision between Boost.FSM and Boost.Statechart: [...]" "The following compilers are known to have problems or most likely will have ones: * Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 and 7.0. Most probably will fail to compile due to lack of partial template specialization support. * Borland C++ Builder 5.5.1 (free version). Fails to compile due to lack of partial template specialization and in-class using declarations support. Some other minor problems also have been noticed. Newer versions of the compiler have not been tested. * OpenWatcom 1.5. Fails to compile due to problems with Boost.MPL code. Newer versions of the compiler have not been tested. * SunPro C++ Compiler 5.5 for Solaris (SPARC). Most likely will show problems with function overload resolution. Newer versions of the compiler have not been tested." The current submission is available from the sandbox vault at http://tinyurl.com/yjozfn (or http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=FSM.zip &directory=&PHPSESSID=48493076c1ea60ae316f7b60f15b9ed1, if you prefer.) ---------------------------------- What to include in Review Comments ---------------------------------- 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. Thanks in advance for your participation in this review. MV

3 2

forwarding-function macro library?
by Isaac Dupree 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

Is there a macro library in Boost for making forwarding functions (the thing that can only be done perfectly in C++0x, with decltype, rvalue references and perhaps parameter packs)? I found myself needing to do that again, as I worked more on my ideas for integer wrapping, and so I started making a macro library for it... I have no idea where I'd look to find if such a thing already existed, beyond reading the summaries of all the Boost libraries. I suppose it would be helpful to have a general library in Boost to do that? (with all the compiler workarounds, the choice of the user which workaround to prefer, etc.) (more generally/irrelevantly, I'm surprised how often Boost libraries share techniques that ought to be libraries in themselves. And how poorly commented some of Boost code is... but there I'm getting way off topic :-P) -Isaac

3 3

[1.36.0 beta][serialization] One more typo
by Ivan A. Melnikov 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

In 1.36.0 beta, in file boost/serialization/detail/shared_ptr_132.hpp, an ifdefed-out line 20 states: #include <boost/serializaition/detail/shared_ptr_nmt_132.hpp> Note misspelled word: serializaition. Maybe we could add some simple test (like those that check for propper line endings) to check for such typos? At least for includes that start with boost/... -- Best Regards, Ivan A. Melnikov <iv(a)altlinux.org>

1 0

[preprocessor] Reverse file iteration
by Robert Dailey 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

Hi, Is it possible to do a reverse iteration? For example: # define BOOST_PP_ITERATION_LIMITS (5, 0) Looking at the preprocessor output from MSVC9, I'm seeing that it works properly. By properly, I mean I'm getting my "primary" template first, and then several specialized versions under that one. I'm using reverse iteration here so that I can create class specializations, while at the same time keeping my primary template at the "top", since it will be the first to be created. However, any code that tries to use a specialized version of my class does not compile. It says insufficient number of template parameters, which leads me to believe iteration limits does not expect start to be greater than finish. Any advice here? I'll post code if needed.

2 1

[units][1.36.0 beta] A bug?
by Ivan A. Melnikov 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

In boost 1.36 beta, in file boost/units/homogeneous_system.hpp line 21 states: #include <boost/is_same.hpp> while no such file seem to exist. Is it a bug or am I missing something? -- Best Regards, Ivan A. Melnikov <iv at altlinux dot org>

5 5

Updating news feeds
by Martin Vuille 11 Aug '08

11 Aug '08

Hi, I am trying to update the news feed on the website by following the instructions at http://www.boost.org/development/website_updating.html In step two, bjam reports that the python script failed, but there is no error message from the script itself. In fact, if I run the script manually with the same arguments as bjam, it works fine and returns a zero exit status. Am I missing something obvious? MV

1 0

[1.36] Ready to ship
by Beman Dawes 11 Aug '08

11 Aug '08

The plan to start packaging 1.36 for release tomorrow (Saturday). The beta went smoothly enough that there seems little benefit of further betas or release candidates. Please do not may any further branches/release code commits without checking with me first. Please do not make any documentation commits after 11::00 AM UTC Saturday (6 AM US Eastern Daylight Time). Thanks, --Beman

2 2

[ANN] Boost.Proto committed to trunk
by Eric Niebler 11 Aug '08

11 Aug '08

I've just committed Boost.Proto v4 to trunk (http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/48079) This version is represents a significant reworking from the version that was reviewed and accepted back in April. Although the code is quite stable now, I have not yet integrated all the feedback about the documentation. It is my intention to bring the docs up to Boost standards in time to get Proto into 1.37. I am leaving the old version of Proto at boost/xpressive/proto for the time being, since some other projects (Xpressive, Spirit2 Qi and Karma) are relying on it. It will be removed at the earliest opportunity. I've also updated the proto.zip archive in the Boost file vault and uploaded the latest docs to: http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/libs/proto/doc/html/index.html Thanks, -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com

1 0