April 2014 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Boost.Align review begins today
by Ahmed Charles 21 Apr '14

21 Apr '14

Hi all, The review of Boost.Align by Glen Fernandes commences today, Friday, 11 April, and concludes Sunday, 20 April. Boost.Align provides: 1. Function align() to align a pointer, for implementations which do not provide C++11's std::align(). 2. Functions aligned_alloc() and aligned_free() for dynamic allocation with specified alignment. { For use in place of ::operator new() and ::operator delete(). } 3. Class template aligned_allocator as an alignment-aware allocator that also allows specifying a minimum alignment. { For use in place of std::allocator. } 4. Class template aligned_allocator_adaptor to turn any existing allocator into an alignment-aware allocator that also allows specifying a minimum alignment. { For use in place of any existing allocator type. } 5. Function is_aligned() to test the alignment of a pointer. Rationale: C++11 added the ability to specify increased alignment (over-alignment) for class types. Unfortunately, ::operator new allocation functions, new expressions, and the default allocator, std::allocator, do not support dynamic memory allocation of over-aligned data. Notes: This library also meets needs in existing Boost libraries. - Boost.Smart_Ptr has its own implementation of align(). - Boost.Interprocess and Boost.Log each have their own implementation of aligned_alloc() and aligned_free(). Source: doc: http://glenfe.github.io/align git: http://github.com/glenfe/align zip: http://github.com/glenfe/align/archive/master.zip Please always state in your review whether you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library. Additionally, please consider giving feedback on the following general topics: - 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? Ahmed Charles Review Manager

10 26

Boost.Align review results
by Ahmed Charles 21 Apr '14

21 Apr '14

The review of the proposed Boost.Align library ended on April 20, 2014. The result is: Accepted with conditions. Glen and I would like to thank everyone for contributing to the review for Boost.Align. either with a review or comments in the discussions. The summary of formal votes is as follows (alphabetical order): Andrey Semashev - Yes (conditional) Antony Polukhin - Yes (conditional) Bjorn Reese - Yes Lars Viklund - Yes Michael Spencer - Yes For a total of 5 votes for acceptance and 0 votes for rejection. The conditional acceptance is based on the quality of documentation, as the feedback given on code and design has already been addressed. The conditions below are agreeable to the author: 1. QuickBook documentation should be used, following typical Boost documentation structure. 2. Additional examples should be used to make the understanding/use of the library easier. 3. Additional minor comments from the reviews should be addressed. I would like to thank Glen for making this an easy first review manager experience and I look forward to reviewing other libraries in the future.

2 1

Application need a Review Manager. Anyone is interested?
by Renato Forti 21 Apr '14

21 Apr '14

>> So do a ton of other libraries waiting in the review queue. >> One trend I've noticed in recent reviews is that the libraries which find review managers are small, sometimes very small. It might be worth breaking up Application into smaller libraries if you want a faster review. I think that I can split it. >> Equally, AFIO has 1000 active lines of code, and I very much doubt it'll see a review manager any time soon. I'm thinking maybe next year it might >> (I will speak at C++ Now introducing the session on the Future of Boost, which will mention AFIO :) ). Nice! I will check! >> FYI, I'd just love if Application's design rationale told me why and how it's similar or different to Boost.Process. Process is one of the most popular non-official Boost libraries out there. Well, I think that are totally different. Quick, Boost.Process is used to start a new process, Boost.Application is the process in fact. Boost.Application provides a model/environment to build any application, not start an application. Some features are: With it you can deploy your application as server (service on windows, and daemon on unix). It provides a plug-in system tool and other facilities (like aspects) that will help developer on application development. It provides a way to create other applications modes, e.g. Apache http server module. Some references: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/756866/Build-a-Server-Application-using… http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/695937/Creating-a-New-Application-Mode Thanks alot for your comments.

4 4

GSoC 2014 - Functional - Monad
by Ding Xiangfei 19 Apr '14

19 Apr '14

Hello, Boost. This is Xiangfei, a first year CS student from National University of Sinagpore. I am familiar with C++ template programming and have learnt a little functional programming language by myself. Therefore I find the monad project in boost will be very interesting and useful. This is my first time applying for GSoC. I have past boost use experience, but it is my first time also to contribute in Boost library. I have a question for the implementation of monad. What is the degree of integration of this module with other Boost utilities other than sequences and containers? Thank you. Regards, Xiangfei

2 10

Re: [boost] [serialization] proposed improvements: forward-compatibility of serialization
by Brian Wood 18 Apr '14

18 Apr '14

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Robert Ramey < robertmacleranramey(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Friday, April 18, 2014 6:40:32 AM UTC-7, Brian Wood wrote: >> >> niXman writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > YAS(https://github.com/niXman/yas) ? >> >> The test results on your page are impressive, but there's >> not much info on what or how you tested. Please give >> some more info on that. >> > > Looks like the YAS version uses a special mem_ostream/mem_istream classes > rather than std::strstream. Since the largest part of any of these > benchmarks is spent on the i/o part this would account for a huge > difference. > > >> >> Also it looks to me like the results you list for text >> serialization are off by a factor of ten. >> > > This is common when the benchmark is compiled in debug mode. The boost > serialization library has a huge amount of extra checking in debug mode > which generally slows things down by a factor of 10. I don't know if > that's the case here though. > > He has this table: | boost | YAS | +------+---------+---------+---------+ | save | 8090 ms | 277 ms | +28000% | +------+---------+---------+---------+ | load | 8794 ms | 265 ms | +33000% | +------------------------------------+ I think the last column is off. It should be +2800% and +3300%. Personally I wouldn't use the percents and would use 28 and 33. -- Brian Ebenezer Enterprises - Heavenly code. http://webEbenezer.net

1 0

Re: [boost] [serialization] proposed improvements: forward-compatibility of serialization
by Brian Wood 18 Apr '14

18 Apr '14

niXman writes: > Hi, > > YAS(https://github.com/niXman/yas) ? The test results on your page are impressive, but there's not much info on what or how you tested. Please give some more info on that. Also it looks to me like the results you list for text serialization are off by a factor of ten. -- Brian Ebenezer Enterprises - So far G-d has helped us. http://webEbenezer.net

1 0

[phoenix] Test failures on clang
by Andrey Semashev 18 Apr '14

18 Apr '14

Hi, I'm seeing Boost.Log test failures on clang. The errors come from Boost.Phoenix/Boost.Proto: http://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/marshall-ma… It seems like actor assignment operator got broken recently.

2 1

Benchmarks comparing JSON libraries - including JSon Spirit
by Klaim - Joël Lamotte 18 Apr '14

18 Apr '14

http://blog.thousandeyes.com/efficiency-comparison-c-json-libraries/ I think this benchmark (with sources) might interest people who were recently planning to make an official Boost library for JSON parsing. In particular, this benchmark include JSon Spirit which is based on Boost Spirit. These benchmark might be useful for future tests.

4 5

Help with a shared_ptr problem on Android (ARM)
by Peter Dimov 17 Apr '14

17 Apr '14

https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/9912 reports that spinlock_gcc_arm.hpp segfaults on a Nexus 7. Unfortunately, I know next to nothing about ARM or Android, so I wonder if someone can help with that.

3 4

Application : Question about Review/Review Manager
by Renato Forti 17 Apr '14

17 Apr '14

Hi All, The proposed Boost.Application is on review schedule. http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html I have one question! How get a Review Manager? Anyone can help in this process? How this work? Thanks

2 1