November 2009 - Boost - lists.boost.org

[1.41.0] Release branch open for low-risk merges
by Beman Dawes 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

branches\release is open for low-risk merges. Use your own judgment as to what "low-risk" is, but as always stability on trunk is one of the criteria. Towards the middle of next week we will take a look at where we stand as far as the freeze for final release. We can always decide to do a second beta, too. But please do any outstanding merges as soon as you are sure they are stable, rather than waiting until the last moment. Thanks, --Beman

3 3

[1.41.0] Release branch closed for all changes; beta RC tomorrow
by Beman Dawes 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

The release branch is closed for all changes. Unless someone objects strenuously, I'll build a release candidate for the beta tomorrow (Tuesday) morning, eastern US time. --Beman

8 14

[timer] an accumulating_timer would be nice
by Thorsten Ottosen 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

Hi, For some measurements, it would be nice with a timer with the following interface class accumulating_timer { public: accumulating_timer(); // don't start timing void start(); void stop(); double elapsed() const; }; The benefit here would be that we don't have to convert to seconds until that data is actually needed. Thoughts? -Thorsten

1 0

Boost Graph Library license (boost_1_40_0/libs/graph/LICENSE)
by Troels Walsted Hansen 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

Hi Doug and boost developers, In a message to this mailing list on 2006-03-12 ( http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2006/03/101902.php) Doug mentioned that the Boost Graph Library had been entirely converted to the regular Boost Software License (http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt) However, even the latest boost 1.40.0 distribution contains a file called boost_1_40_0/libs/graph/LICENSE which contains the text of the old The Boost Graph Library "Artistic License". This is slightly confusing because it could be interpreted to mean that the Boost Graph Library is still covered by the Artistic License. Can you confirm that this file is dead and void? Can it be removed from the boost distribution to avoid any license ambiguity? Thanks, Troels

2 1

Reminder: ** Please don't overquote **
by David Abrahams 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

I'm seeing lots of messages that quote entire threads before adding a paragraph (or sometimes just a sentence) out-of-line. Please try to keep the list and its archives readable by pruning the quoted text before posting (http://www.boost.org/community/policy.html#quoting) Thanks -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com Boost Moderator http://www.boost.org

1 0

Re: [boost] [1.41.0] Beta 1 available
by Vladimir Prus 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

Daniel James wrote: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Ovanes Markarian <om_boost(a)keywallet.com> wrote: >> Hello *, >> the link in the docs to Property Tree points to the wrong location. >> http://beta.boost.org/doc/libs/1_40_0/libs/property_tree/index.html >> if changing to http://beta.boost.org/doc/libs/1_41_0/libs and clicking to >> Property Tree the link points to: >> http://beta.boost.org/doc/libs/1_41_0/libs/property_tree/index.html >> But this file does not exist either. > > The documentation isn't uploaded to the site until the final release. > You can see the property tree documentation in the download. The beta > site isn't really meant for general use. Speaking of documentation: 1. It appears that http://www.boost.org/boost-build2/index.html is still broken. Is there any way to figure why? 2. Looking at http://beta.boost.org/users/news/version_1_41_0 I do not see a section 'Build System' -- which is present in boost_1_41_0.qbk Is this expected? - Volodya

2 1

[1.41.0] Beta 1 CMake 1
by troy d. straszheim 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

The boost.cmake beta that shadows upstream releases is out. Docs: http://sodium.resophonic.com/boost-cmake/1.41.0.beta1.cmake1/doc Tarballs and zipfiles: http://sodium.resophonic.com/boost-cmake/1.41.0.beta1.cmake1 Followups on the boost-cmake list please. -t

1 0

1.41.0 cmake options
by Neal Becker 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

If I wanted to try cmake, can I use cmake with my favorite options? I'm currently using: bjam -sHAVE_ICU=1 -sEXPAT_INCLUDE=/usr -sEXPAT_LIBPATH=/usr/lib64 -- layout=tagged threading=single,multi stage Can I set these options with cmake, and if so, how?

2 2

Re: [boost] New boost packaging suggestion for windows
by Julian Bangert 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

Hello, I just noticed an error crept into my earlier posted link: The correct link for google is: http://boost-win-bin.googlecode.com/files/boost_1_40_0-vc9-preview.7z I would appreciate any comments on this distribution, so that I could pack it up with an installer and really "release" it. Again, this distribution pretty much contains all of boost - all configurations for a single version of Visual C++, without Python or MPI, but is very tightly pakced into around 30 MB ( a 30th of the current boostpro distribution size ) Yrs, Julian Bangert

2 1

loglite - A logging library
by JD 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

Hello, It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the boost mailing list. I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here a couple of years ago. Find it here : http://code.google.com/p/loglite/ I've removed all mention to boost in the code, cause I've made some design choice that wouldn't fit with the boost philosophy. Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved. An example : [example removed because of the now infamous anti-top-posting gmane feature] Regards, JD

7 14