August 2017 - Boost - lists.boost.org

[config] BOOST_STATIC_CONSTEXPR in C++11 vs C++14
by Lakshay Garg 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

This conversation is in reference to https://github.com/boostorg/math/pull/82 but I'm posting it here because it might be of interest to some. On 22 August 2017 at 13:53, jzmaddock <notifications(a)github.com> wrote: > Note that those changes don't actually make the functions constexpr - or > indeed change the way the constants are initialized - in fact in C++14 > BOOST_STATIC_CONSTEXPR doesn't even imply the constants are "const > (C++11 is different, and early implementations prevent you from writing > "constexpr const" which is what C++14 permits). Since BOOST_STATIC_CONSTEXPR behaves differently in C++11 and 14, would it be a good idea for boost.config to provide a macro for handling the `static const var = ...;` kind of variable initializations in a portable manner? Maybe something like BOOST_COMPILETIME_CONSTANT? Such a macro might will be useful for declarations where we want the variable to be a constant in all possible senses (compile-time, run-time) and allow generating the most optimal code possible with the language version, compiler being used in a portable manner. An example of the kind of constants I am talking about can be seen here: https://github.com/boostorg/math/blob/develop/include/boost/math/special_fu… Lakshay

5 8

Review Request: impl_ptr (pimpl)
by Vladimir Batov 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

After much procrastination I would like to request a formal review for the pimpl library... once and for all :-) (given it's been through a few almost-reviews and discussions)... to get some kind of a resolution one way or the other. :-) On one hand it is embarrassingly simple and no match to a string of late TMP submissions. On the other hand it seems quite handy for ordinary s/w folk (like me) as it formalizes, streamlines and noticeably simplifies (IMO) pimpl-based deployments and makes code-review process quite simple and straightforward. Its benefits are more visible for pimpls with exclusive-ownership proxy-implementation relationships (value-semantics pimpls) as it uses internally an incomplete-type management smart pointer instead of std:unique_ptr. Given that it is policy-based I am hoping others might get interested writing additional policies within that framework such as COW or stack-based. The major oddity/peculiarity (that caused a stir before and Gavin mentioned about a year ago) is that the main class -- impl_ptr -- is declared in the global namespace. That might happen to be a deal breaker but that's the best I could come up with to get it to work. If anyone has a better working solution, I am all ears. That "oddity" is an "implementation detail" and does not affect the user -- from the user side it appears inside boost. Like boost::impl_ptr... Internally to address that we might think of striking a compromise. For ex., instead of the traditional namespace boost { template<> class impl_ptr } have template<> class _boost_impl_ptr_ Again, that is an implementation nit, wrinkle, niggle (IMO anyway). From the outside it all looks kosher -- boost::impl_ptr<...> and such. The code and the docs are at https://github.com/yet-another-user/pimpl <https://github.com/yet-another-user/pimpl>. Due to personal circumstances Glen -- Pimpl's original manager -- had to bail out. So, if anyone kindly steps forward to manage the review, that'd be immensely appreciated. Thank you, Vladimir. P.S. Ron, I am only CCing you so that you'd put it to the schedule... Tnx.

9 28

[release] Boost 1.65.0
by Daniel James 22 Aug '17

22 Aug '17

Release 1.65.0 of the Boost C++ Libraries is now available. These open-source libraries work well with the C++ Standard Library, and are usable across a broad spectrum of applications. The Boost license encourages both commercial and non-commercial use. This release contains two new libraries and numerous enhancements and bug fixes for existing libraries. For details, including download links, see <http://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_65_0.html> You can also download directly from: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/release/1.65.0/> To install this release on your system, see <http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/more/getting_started/index.html> Thanks to everyone who participated in this release. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team Vladimir Prus, Rene Rivera, Marshall Clow, Eric Niebler, Daniel James, Beman Dawes

6 5

[math] regression tests failing in develop (2017-08-21)
by Ion Gaztañaga 22 Aug '17

22 Aug '17

I'm receiving the following error in my runners: error: Unable to find file or target named error: 'polynomial_concept_check.cpp' error: referred to from project at error: '../libs/math/test' It seems related to the following change: https://github.com/boostorg/math/commit/f6495af64c05416ed098d6acf6da70911c7… Best, Ion

3 3

Broken unary_functions in numeric conversions
by Gary Furnish 22 Aug '17

22 Aug '17

SHA-1: 2009f0d4fc49a6db59b950a3140f8d1f58e1a8c6 * Revert "removed deprecated std::unary_function from various conversion functors" This reverts commit 593aafab5a7aba86f14df5f9a14a53fc4353bb00. Without this commit boost\libs\numeric\conversion\include\boost\numeric\conversion\detail\converter.hpp is broken on MSVC C++17. (See https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/12972) This is still fixed in develop, does anyone know why the changes were reverted? Can we get someone to actually recommit a fix? Is numeric conversion abandoned? It doesn't look like it has been touched in over a year. Thanks

5 8

[math] mark constants as constexpr
by Lakshay Garg 21 Aug '17

21 Aug '17

Hello all The boost.math library stores quite a few constants for improving performance of various operations (example: boost/math/special_functions/detail/unchecked_factorial.hpp). I was wondering if marking these constants as constexpr would be desirable. Please provide feedback / suggestions so that I can get started :) Lakshay

2 4

Property Tree Maintainer
by Gary Furnish 21 Aug '17

21 Aug '17

I've emailed Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl -at- getdesigned.at> and never got a responce, is property tree abandoned? There are a bunch of PRs (including mine at https://github.com/boostorg/property_tree/pull/29) piling up on github. I'm not exactly sure what the procedure is if it is, but maybe we could get some love for PRs from community maintainers or something? Thanks,

2 1

Boost 1.65.0 Release Candidate 5
by Daniel James 20 Aug '17

20 Aug '17

Hello everyone, The fifth release candidate for the 1.65.0 release is now available at: https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/release/1.65.0/source/ [ Note: The RC1s/RC2s/RC3s/RC4s are in that directory, too - make sure you get the right files! ] It can also be downloaded from the 'in progress' release notes on the website: http://www.boost.org/users/history/in_progress.html Changes since RC4: * Fully qualify the name of a trait to fix an error in recent versions of Visual Studio. Changes since RC3: * Fix a bug in Boost.Thread where timed waits were waiting for a very long time. Changes since RC2: * Fix a crashing bug in Boost.ASIO * Fix a compilation error when including both <boost/math_fwd.hpp> and <boost/math/common_factor_ct.hpp> * An update to Boost.Spirit to fix compilation errors on Mac OS with -std=c++17 Changes since RC1: * An update to Boost.Config so that the flags BOOST_NO_CXX98_RANDOM_SHUFFLE and BOOST_NO_CXX98_BINDERS are now set appropriately for libc++. (This fixes the compilation errors for Boost.Test) * An update to Boost.Fiber to fix compilation errors * An update to Boost.Wave to fix compilation errors on Mac OS with -std=c++17 The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 4873d8f3506fd8d76e2eadcf0ace83b258010fc268a4d974361af7abad5448f5 boost_1_65_0_rc5.7z ea26712742e2fb079c2a566a31f3266973b76e38222b9f88b387e3c8b2f9902c boost_1_65_0_rc5.tar.bz2 8a142d33ab4b4ed0de3abea3280ae3b2ce91c48c09478518c73e5dd2ba8f20aa boost_1_65_0_rc5.tar.gz f3f5c37be45eb6516c95cd147d8aa4abb9b52121fc3eccc1fc65c4af0cf48592 boost_1_65_0_rc5.zip As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. Thanks! -- The release managers

3 3

Boost 1.65.0 Release Candidate 4
by Marshall Clow 19 Aug '17

19 Aug '17

The fourth (and hopefully final) release candidates for the 1.65.0 release are now available at: https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/release/1.65.0/source/ [ Note: The RC1s/RC2s/RC3s are in that directory, too - make sure you get the right files! ] Changes since RC3: * Fix a bug in Boost.Thread where timed waits were waiting for a very long time. Changes since RC2: * Fix a crashing bug in Boost.ASIO * Fix a compilation error when including both <boost/math_fwd.hpp> and <boost/math/common_factor_ct.hpp> * An update to Boost.Spirit to fix compilation errors on Mac OS with -std=c++17 Changes since RC1: * An update to Boost.Config so that the flags BOOST_NO_CXX98_RANDOM_SHUFFLE and BOOST_NO_CXX98_BINDERS are now set appropriately for libc++. (This fixes the compilation errors for Boost.Test) * An update to Boost.Fiber to fix compilation errors * An update to Boost.Wave to fix compilation errors on Mac OS with -std=c++17 The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 5d255d1ff8460d52dffcf9a9b55d908ae704027a66c590ec774096effaea26c1 boost_1_65_0_rc4.7z 911602d830ea5d16483d1e565b9859d120d03f2e5176017226ef391eb9d17fc8 boost_1_65_0_rc4.tar.bz2 369e06dc787d32b0fbaae020f33d814c9e7b77263acb859776968e623035f760 boost_1_65_0_rc4.tar.gz a9c6b8346b05ea43ac4278e80036a9e956ea99fc61f0b7f55469471af2df934c boost_1_65_0_rc4.zip As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. Thanks! -- The release managers

13 24

Improving Boost Docs
by Robert Ramey 18 Aug '17

18 Aug '17

I'm aware that at one point there was an initiative to improve boost documentation. See https://svn.boost.org/trac10/wiki/ImprovingBoostDocs It seems that the last movement here was 10 years ago. Does anyone know what the current status of this is? Does anyone still work on it? Does anyone know anything about it? I'm just curious about this. Robert Ramey

13 44