February 2017 - Boost - lists.boost.org

A GUI Library
by jinhao 09 Nov '17

09 Nov '17

Hi, all I am developing a GUI library, it takes aim at easy-to-use and portable library for modern C++ methods. The project at http://stdex.sourceforge.net A git repository at http://nanapro.codeplex.com A brief at http://nanaproject.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/preliminary-study-of-nana-c-lib… Is there any interest in this library? Regards Jinhao

8 8

Re: [boost] Boost CRC maintainer (Daryle Walker) missing in action?
by Olaf van der Spek 19 Jun '17

19 Jun '17

Hi Daryle, Any luck on your new setup? Gr, Olaf On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Daryle Walker <darylew(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I can look at it once I've finished my new setup. > > I had to reset my computer after a partial crash years ago. I never > got around to recreating my programming setup. My computer had been > at its maximum Operating System level back then, which is now 3 > versions behind. For the past few months, I've had my sister's old > laptop, with Windows Vista, and am trying to add a programming setup > to it now. > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Beman Dawes <bdawes(a)acm.org> wrote: >> Hi Daryle, >> >> This guy has volunteered to take over maintenance of Boost CRC. Should >> we take him up on his offer? > >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: >> Date: Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:51 AM >> Subject: [boost] Boost CRC maintainer (Daryle Walker) missing in action? >> To: boost(a)lists.boost.org >> >> >> Hi, >> >> It looks like the Boost CRC maintainer (Daryle Walker) is missing in action? >> >> No response to tickets from the past 3 years. What's the procedure in this case? >> >> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2492 >> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/query?component=crc&col=id&col=summary&col… > > -- > Daryle Walker > Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie > darylew AT gmail DOT com -- Olaf

2 2

[beast] Request for Discussion
by Vinnie Falco 12 Jun '17

12 Jun '17

Beast provides low level HTTP and WebSocket interfaces built on Boost.Asio, the project is here: https://github.com/vinniefalco/Beast The plan is to solicit feedback from the Boost community before submitting a request for a formal review. First a brief update: I have attended CppCon 2016 and provided a 15 minute Lightning Talk on the library. There should be a video up at some point with all the talks, including mine. I spread the word about Beast and discovered that there are several folks in the wild already using the library and happy with it. There are also a couple of commercial products that are using it. One point brought up during the conference is that Beast does not offer sufficient higher level HTTP functionality. This omission is intentional. It is my idea to offer the building blocks (serializing and deserializing HTTP/1 messages, in synchronous and asynchronous flavors, and a universal HTTP message model), upon which other developers more knowledgeable than me could build those interfaces. The higher level pubic operations requested were: 1. Perform HTTP GET or POST and receive the response. Presumably this would handle both plain and TLS connections, handle redirects, and handle HEAD requests. Not sure about traversing proxies. 2. Expose an asynchronous HTTP server class which callers can instantiate with some sort of handler that returns the HTTP response given a request. It should be possible, in a minimal number of lines, to quickly get a server up and running. The requestor informed me that this functionality did not need to provide every possible feature or handle every use case. It just needed to handle the common use-cases. For the record, I am against this higher level functionality for a number of reasons. The higher the level of functionality, the more contentious the feature becomes, and the harder it is to satisfy a quorum of reviewers. No one would dispute that we need the ability to read a complete HTTP message from a socket. But not everyone will agree that a HTTP server needs an option to allow multiple listening sockets with different level of permissions. Another problem with offering higher level functionality is that it could be less likely to be approved for standardization in the C++ standard library. For example, the attributes of ease of use and fully functional oppose each other. If the functionality offered by a hypothetical std::http::client is not sufficient, a developer would be forced to write their own with little possibility to reuse parts of the implementation from the stdlib. I doubt the committee would approve of such a thing. I know I wouldn't. Admittedly I have little experience or knowledge on what would or would not get approved. A point was raised that a low-level-only HTTP implementation in Boost has the potential to discourage new users that need to perform simple operations like HTTP GET from using Boost in the future, given that robustly handling such operations would require the developer to write a significant amount of code. I can see some validity here. On the other hand, if Boost.Asio was submitted for a formal review today, would those same points be raised? Would Asio get rejected because it doesn't offer public interfaces for doing simple tasks like requesting an object from a web server? I wonder if perhaps the Boost formal review process has become defective. For reference here is what the current API offers: Example program that performs HTTP GET, then receives and prints the response: https://github.com/vinniefalco/Beast/blob/master/examples/http_example.cpp This is a high performance asynchronous HTTP server that serves local files as static pages. It is not an official API, it is part of the examples. Users who want a server need to copy the source code and modify it to suit their needs: https://github.com/vinniefalco/Beast/blob/master/examples/http_async_server… My initial purpose for requesting this discussion is two-fold: 1. Determine the level of consensus on the issue that Beast needs to do more for HTTP than the lowest level of functionality (reading and writing messages). I'm open to hearing all arguments for and against. 2. Get feedback on what official public interfaces to higher level functionality might look like. Specifically, a client that handles GET and POST, and a generic asynchronous server. And what features those interfaces would support. For example, is traversing a proxy a necessary feature for an official client interface? The best answers would provide function signatures or class declarations using the existing Beast HTTP types. In case its not clear, I am asking stakeholders and reviewers to help design the library. I'll open a discourse on the HTTP client to illustrate the proposed style of discussion: We want to provide a HTTP client implementation that lets users perform simple tasks like fetch a resource from a remote host. Calling code should be compact, letting people get their job done without getting mired in boilerplate. Here's a possible signature with example use: response_v1<string_body> get(std::string const& url, error_code& ec); error_code ec; auto res = get("http://boost.org", ec); if(! ec) std::cout << res; else std::cerr << ec.message() << '\n'; The get function would automatically perform the name resolution, connect the socket, request the resource with uri "/", and return the result. There's a problem here though, the caller is forced to use a message with std::string as the container for the body. An obvious fix is to add a template parameter: template<class Body = string_body> response_v1<Body> get(std::string const& url, error_code& ec); Better, but what if the body is not DefaultConstructible? We can add some parameters to forward to the Body constructor: template<class Body = string_body, Args&&... args> response_v1<Body> get(std::string const& url, error_code& ec, Args&&... args); We're getting somewhere now. Most users will use the default body, while an option exists for advanced users. But the implementation of get now has a complication. If an error occurs, it still has to construct a return value. This problem is likely surmountable but lets table it and start a new line of reasoning. What if the URI indicates https, e.g. "https://boost.org"? We can hide that under the hood by using a separate code path that uses asio::ssl::stream instead of ip::tcp::socket. But how does the caller provide the root CA certificates? How does the caller provide a client certificate? We are left with a client that satisfies two thirds of users but is unusable for the remaining one third. Is this Boost worthy? Is this std-lib worthy? I think not. Lets revisit the SSL issues later and think about a new problem. What happens to the socket when the request is done? In the proposed interface, the socket is destroyed. This means you can only make one request on a connection. At this point, I think its clear that the current interface is a non-starter. Here's a better idea. Lets define a class called client and make get a member function. Now we can have state, including configurable settings with reasonable defaults. class client { public: template<class Option> void set_option(Option&&); template<class Body = string_body, Args&&... args> response_v1<Body> get(std::string const& url, error_code& ec, Args&&... args); }; client c; error_code ec; auto res = c.get("http://boost.org", ec); if(! ec) std::cout << res; else std::cerr << ec.message() << '\n'; We still have some of the original problems, but other problems are solved. The class can keep the socket around, so that a subsequent call to get with the same server will use the already-open socket. The caller can set options on the client object instance before invoking get, such as any TLS certificates. Unfortunately we have new problems. Where is the io_service? If the class creates it for you, how many threads? How do I use my existing io_service, or is that even necessary? The class interface allows the connection to be kept alive but what if now the caller wants to close it (i.e. specify "Connection: close" in the request)? And there are some problems which are applicable to any interface. How does the caller adjust the parser options, for example change the limit on the size of the body? What if the caller wants the request made using a specific HTTP version? How does this handle basic authentication? How can the caller adjust the headers in the request? etc... This is why I think that offering a HTTP client is a rabbit hole which can only lead to a rejected formal review. Or maybe I am overthinking this? I'd love to hear proposed solutions to the issues (which could be just to say "forget about those features"). Despite my objection I have started work on these features anyway. Here are the beginnings of a HTTP client: https://github.com/vinniefalco/Beast/blob/88b485df7e6216282842f40cf99cc75de… Here is some work on a generic server: https://github.com/vinniefalco/Beast/blob/server/extras/beast/http/async_se… Please reply to this thread instead of starting a new thread, and keep the subject line prefix (e.g. "Re: [boost] [beast] ...") Thank you

21 58

[build] [config] check_target_builds and feature.subfeature composition
by Edward Diener 30 May '17

30 May '17

The Boost library config uses the check_target_builds rule to provide build time feature testing. Other Boost libraries use config checks in their own build and test jamfiles. I have found that this works reliably when a particular toolset is used in a normal manner. However when using the feature.subfeature and feature.compose rules to extend the toolset-version designation with a subfeature, such that the toolset designation now becomes toolset-version-subfeature, the use of the check_target_builds rule does not work as expected. In particular the individual check_target_builds rule results are put into a subdirectory based on the toolset-version and not based on the toolset-version-subfeature when toolset subfeature composition is used. I also suspect that the cached value reflects setup. This causes wrong results in tests where the toolset designation uses subfeatures, and a library's jamfile is using config and/or predef checks. As an example My toolset designation looks like: using gcc : 6.3 : some_path ; feature.subfeature toolset gcc : cxxstd : c03 c11 c14 c17 : optional composite propagated ; feature.compose <toolset-gcc:cxxstd>c03 : <cxxflags>-std=c++03 ; feature.compose <toolset-gcc:cxxstd>c11 : <cxxflags>-std=c++11 ; feature.compose <toolset-gcc:cxxstd>c14 : <cxxflags>-std=c++14 ; feature.compose <toolset-gcc:cxxstd>c17 : <cxxflags>-std=c++1z ; A library's test looks like: import ../../config/checks/config : requires ; run some_test.cpp : : : [ requires cxx11_hdr_forward_list ] ; If I run some some_test with toolset=gcc-6.3-c03, the config result for checking if forward list is supported is put into a subdirectory reflecting the toolset-version while the test result will be put into a subdirectory reflecting the toolset-version-subfeature. Subsequently if I run some_test with toolset=gcc-6.3-c11 the config result is taken from the subdirectory reflect the toolset-version even though whether the forward list is supported or not depends very much on the subfeature I am designating as part of the toolset. This naturally causes incorrect results for the test. Is this a known problem ? Is it a problem with Boost Build or is it a problem with how config uses the check_target_builds rule ? I have run into this problem extensively in my testing once I started to use the feature.subfeature ability of Boost Build.

5 9

[msm] [statechart] unmerged PRs
by András Kucsma 23 May '17

23 May '17

Hi Everyone, There are a couple of PRs for msm and statechart by me and others, which didn't get any attention for many months now. Can the maintainers please take a look at them? https://github.com/boostorg/msm/pulls https://github.com/boostorg/statechart/pulls Thank you, Andras

2 2

[clang] clang-cl expansion of macros
by Edward Diener 29 Apr '17

29 Apr '17

You can get clang-cl ( clang-win ) to show its VC++ emulated expansion of macros somewhat by passing the c++ option '-fmacro-backtrace-limit=0' to the compiler. It is still blessedly difficult to see the what and the why of clang's error messages when expanding macro using clang-cl, but at least it gives you a better chance of understanding where clang's emulation of VC++ has gone wrong. I have posted bug 27380 to the llvm/clang bug tracker at https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27380 showing the main failure in VC++ emulation which I see when testing Boost PP with clang-cl.

3 8

[container] moving a pre-built vector into a flat_set
by Sam Kellett 12 Mar '17

12 Mar '17

a common problem i encounter is that i have two stage's w/r/t to a large collection of data: building and querying. vector is obviously the king of building. flat_set is the king of querying. so what i often tend to do is build up a very large vector, sort it then create a flat_set using the flat_set(ordered_unique_t) constructor. however this still copies the entire vector into the flat_set, right? what i would like to be able to do is move the vector straight into the flat_set, something like: std::vector<T> data; flat_set data_set1(std::move(data)) // move vector in and sort it // or: std::sort(data.begin(), data.end()); // sort vector flat_set data_set2(ordered_unique_t, std::move(data)) // and move it in is this doable (am i just being blind?) or is there plans/interest for this?

8 19

[Endian] Reading/writing from/to byte buffers
by Olaf van der Spek 10 Mar '17

10 Mar '17

Hi, One often needs to read or write values from/to a buffer while having a pointer. Could you support this? I guess one could use *reinterpret_cast<big_int64_buf_t&>(*p) but I think functions would be more convenient. On second guess one probably has to use memcpy rather then reinterpret_cast. The functions are probably implemented already but aren't exposed. https://github.com/boostorg/endian/issues/17 -- Olaf

2 3

[stacktrace] review
by Artyom Beilis 10 Mar '17

10 Mar '17

Hello, This is my review of stacktrace library: Note that I have experience with the subject as I developed a similar library for the CppCMS framework [1] > - What is your evaluation of the design? > The design is straight forward and I don't see any major issues with the API. Also I have several suggestions in handling backtrace with catch from } catch (const traced& e) { std::cerr << e.what() << '\n'; if (e.trace) { std::cerr << "Backtrace:\n" << e.trace << '\n'; } } catch (const std::exception& e) { std::cerr << e.what() << '\n'; } In my library I use much simpler approach in terms of API [2] catch(std::exception const &e) { std::cerr << e.what() << std::endl; std::cerr << booster::trace(e); } Where booster::trace is a manipulator that prints strack trace if "e" contains backtrace information - much shorted code without additional catch. I find it very easy to use. Just a suggestion. I also like with_trace templated class idea. > - What is your evaluation of the implementation? Most of my > personal concerns with this library are with the implementation and I > would hugely appreciate feedback from others with substantial > experience of using stacktracing "in anger" in non-trivial use case > scenarios. I mostly reviewed the backend. Linux: ========= 1st of all: I recommend mentioning in the documentation the option -rdynamic/-export-dynamic as otherwise dladdr would likely to fail - it is critical as many may miss one. Regarding use of add2line utility: 1. Failing to calling an external program in case of dladdr fails is bad idea. This behaviour is unexpected by the user. I understand the advantage of this as you can use debug information but should be done only per user specific request (i.e. compilation option) and not by default. 2. If you call add2line - use it for ALL addresses in backtrace at once and not for each single one! My recommendation is to provide alternative backed that uses other way to extract information not involving forking. Maybe try to analyze debug data or so - or require preparing initial map using nm tool and than loading it from file or something like that. Additionally calling the backed linux is bad - as same approach with slight modifications works on *BSD, Mac OS X and Solaris (RIP). Windows: ======== I have a question why you used COM instead of SymFromAddr functions? I understand thread safety issues but simple mutex can solve them. My concerns are regarding MinGW compilers. Have you tested it on MinGW compiler? It wouldn't work as it used MSVC debug information in general so maybe it is good idea to provide an alternative backend that extracts only address and DLL name so you can analyse the stacktrace later (using addr2line utility for example) Take a look on my code [1] regarding non-msvc windows compilers - it provides at least some useful information. > - What is your evaluation of the documentation? The documentation is ok in general and straight forward as the library itself. What I do lack is the documentation of underlying backends - how do they work. 1. use of -rdynamic/-export-dynamic should be noted in "bold face" regarding the use of the library. 2. please do not call it "POSIX backend" - as there none of the stuff you use is actually POSIX... Also you'll probably need different backends for MINGW and mention it. > - What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the > library? Very Very useful. > - Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? No I didn't - I mostly read the documentation and the backend code. > - How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A > quick reading? In-depth study? 3-4 hours > - Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? Yes I am. I have written similar library for CppCMS project [1] - FINAL VOTE: Yes, Conditionally Conditions: Use of addr2line must not be enabled by default. [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/cppcms/code/HEAD/tree/framework/trunk/booster/boo… https://sourceforge.net/p/cppcms/code/HEAD/tree/framework/trunk/booster/lib… [2] https://sourceforge.net/p/cppcms/code/HEAD/tree/framework/trunk/booster/boo… Best Regards, Artyom Beilis

4 5

[metal] Feature Complete - Request for Feedback
by Bruno Dutra 05 Mar '17

05 Mar '17

Dear community, As some of you might be aware through sporadic discussions on this mailing list throughout the last couple of years, I've been working for quite a while on a modern template metaprogramming library called Metal, that I advocate as a direct replacement for the aging Boost.MPL. I believe my work is finally complete now and so I come to you to request for feedback and ask whether you think that Metal would be a valuable addition to the Boost distribution. My intention is to request a formal review in the next days / weeks, depending on your preliminary feedback. In a glimpse, Metal is a pure template metaprogramming that explores all modern features available to C++14 to overcome the limitations of Boost.MPL, most notably: * vastly improved performance [1]; * terser syntax [2]. Repository: https://github.com/brunocodutra/metal Documentation: http://brunocodutra.github.io/metal/ Boost Incubator: http://blincubator.com/bi_library/metal-2/?gform_post_id=1566 I appreciate your feedback and opinion on whether Metal is a good fit for Boost! - Previous discussions About a year ago I came to this list to discuss a proposal of merging Metal into MPL as a new API built from ground up, while at the same time serving as a backend for the previous API on modern compilers. At that time, Metal was lazy and very similar to MPL, but since then it underwent great simplification and embraced the all-eager design, so I don't think this would be a good idea anymore. Besides, it soon became clear that this would be a huge undertaking with potential to inadvertently breaking a lot of good code to little gain, so I decided instead to tackle the problem migration from MPL by providing a handy adaptor [3]. [1]: http://metaben.ch/ [2]: http://brunocodutra.github.io/metal/index.html#in_a_glimpse [3]: http://brunocodutra.github.io/metal/group__external.html#gaede6847ad3e0bb64… Regards, Bruno Dutra

13 35