June 2012 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] [review] Multiprecision review (June 8th - 17th, 2012)
by Keith Burton 25 Jun '12

25 Jun '12

Instant reactions on reading though the documentation : 1) Introduction : I would prefer to see e.g. mp::int128_t rather than mp::mp_int128_t, given the stated purpose of the library. 2) cpp_dec_float : Narrowing conversions are truncating. This is a no-no for the usage I have in mind at the moment. 3) Constructing and interconverting : >> // There is a need to be careful with integer types though: >> cpp_int i = 2; >> // Ooops, this really just multiplies by 3: >> i *= 3.14; One of the priorities for my numeric class implementations has always been to protect naive users from equivalent mistakes. What is your evaluation of the design? It is so far beyond anything I have attempted that I cannot usefully comment. The limitations on conversions and mixed precision operations are disappointing but entirely understandable. The ccp_dec_float narrowing conversions being truncating reinforces the my view that the limitations are probably the correct design. What is your evaluation of the implementation? No useful comments. What is your evaluation of the documentation? Good enough to give me confidence to start using the library. I would never expect more than that. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? A vital addition to C++ especially for relatively small tasks in commercial software where the Boost backends can be used because performance is not an overriding concern. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? I have started to use the library to embed test code for my special purpose decimal fixed point classes into an application under development. The only issue, using VS2008 /W4 and Boost 1.48, was the need to disable warning 4996. Unfortunately this has been pre-empted by other work. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? More than a quick reading Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? I have written several numeric classes but all with a narrow scope and protection of naïve users and accuracy as the priority. These were primarily decimal fixed point. Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Yes

3 2

[multiprecision] Last chance for a review.
by John Maddock 24 Jun '12

24 Jun '12

Just to remind everyone that the multiprecision library review is about to come to an end, so it's time to speak up or shut up ;-) Actually we're a little short on reviews generally, so I'd encourage anyone who hasn't taken a look yet to do so, code is the sandbox under /big_number/, docs are viewable online here: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/big_number/libs/multiprecision/doc/h… Many thanks, John.

3 2

Trimming Dependencies (was Boost and exceptions)
by Daniel James 24 Jun '12

24 Jun '12

On 24 June 2012 01:55, Dave Abrahams <dave(a)boostpro.com> wrote: > > on Sat Jun 23 2012, Daniel James <dnljms-AT-gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> That's pretty crazy. Do you know if separating test dependencies would >> make much of a difference? > > They're already separated, along with documentation dependencies. You > *really* don't want to see the graph that includes the test dependencies > ;-) OK, I assumed from the dependencies on Test that they were included, but some headers do depend on Test.

2 1

Boost and exceptions
by Dirk Ulrich 24 Jun '12

24 Jun '12

Dear all, when looking at Boost as a whole its obvious that it uses C++ exceptions to report exceptional conditions because its the C++ way of doing it and it has to interact with the C++ standard library. On the other hand it seems also obvious that some libraries (Boost.Units, Boost.MPL, etc.) do probably not use C++ exceptions at all since they are pure compile time libraries or provide services which do not have exceptional cases. I am working on a C++ based project which forbids the usage of C++ exceptions but it is still preferable to use Boost libraries at least the ones which do not make use of C++ exceptions at all. I am especially interested in using Boost.Units and Boost.Math. Which of Boost libraries do NOT make use of C++ exceptions (i did not find such a list but maybe its already available somewhere)? What would it take to use these libraries as a stand-alone "minimal" Boost library? Thanks

18 71

Boost's on the map
by John Maddock 23 Jun '12

23 Jun '12

Literally in this case: http://softwaremaniacs.org/media/alenacpp/cppmap-2012.png John.

4 3

Re: [boost] Boost and exceptions
by Brian Wood 23 Jun '12

23 Jun '12

John Maddock: > This actually looks compelling enough to me, that we should probably mandate > use of BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION. Are you going to take away their library card if an author doesn't want to do this? ;) Cheers, Brian Wood Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net <http://webebenezer.net/>

1 0

Re: [boost] Boost and exceptions
by Brian Wood 23 Jun '12

23 Jun '12

Fabio Fracassi: > That is how modular development works, you let go of some control in > exchange for synergy effects and free added functionality. > Yes, it creates communication overhead but the win (for the users) is huge. I skipped Boost 1.49 and have been updating these results using Boost 1.50 -- http://webEbenezer.net/comparison.html<http://webebenezer.net/comparison.html> . I haven't noticed any performance improvements in the serialization library that's in Boost from 1.48 to the latest version. Shalom, Brian Wood Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net <http://webebenezer.net/>

1 0

Linked map
by Kannan R 23 Jun '12

23 Jun '12

Recently i wrote a json parser. I used stl map to store the json objects. Everything was fine except the order of the objects. Is it worth to build something in boost to have the map which provides an iterator to get the elements in same order? Please advise.

3 2

exception handling in multithreaded applications (was: RE: Boost and exceptions)
by Thomas Klimpel 23 Jun '12

23 Jun '12

Fabio Fracassi wrote: > Yes it is, because in reality boost exception solves problems for the > users of any library that uses it. When using boost exception I can > safely let exceptions escape threads and have them rethrown in the > starting thread, for instance. I would be interested to learn how you do this. With open-mp (and mpi), my current way to add exception handling code really adds much noise: bool cancel = false; #pragma omp parallel shared(cancel) { try { ... the real code } catch (std::exception& r) { cancel = true; store_exception(r); } } if (cancel) { rethrow_exception(); } Regards, Thomas

2 1

emulating concepts in C++11
by lcaminiti 22 Jun '12

22 Jun '12

Hello all, I was not able to find Boost.Generic source code (I asked Matt Calabrese but no reply): http://blip.tv/boostcon/boost-generic-concepts-without-concepts-5262126 Are you aware of any trick (e.g., the tricks used by Boost.Generic) to emulate concepts in C++11? Thanks. --Lorenzo -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/boost-emulating-concepts-in-C-11-tp46317… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

2 2