October 2018 - Boost - lists.boost.org

CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
by Jon Kalb 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

The libraries produced by the Boost community have had a greater impact on the way that the C++ community writes code than any other library implementation. The focus of the Boost community will always be on the libraries, but it is undeniable that we are dependent on and often limited by the infrastructure of our trade. Years ago, the move to Git was contentious; yet, it was required to improve development. In a similar vein our build system has become an impediment for many developers and users, existing and prospective. Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting users and developers. We understand that the actual process of achieving the end goal will be long, time consuming, and not without its share of conflict. We also recognize that the Boost community is comprised of bright and passionate individuals that are eager to get involved and help get work done. The members of the Steering Committee have been encouraged by the discussions and activity surrounding CMake on the mailing lists over the years and know that many people have voiced visions. We hope that each of you rejoins the discussion to support this initiative and contributes to the common goal of improving Boost’s integration into the broader C++ ecosystem. For the Boost Steering Committee, Jon Kalb, Chair jonkalb(a)boost.org

49 200

[asio][coroutine] forbid_suspend blocks
by Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira 07 Aug '19

07 Aug '19

I've implemented a dumb linter using Python + clang API that allows you to mark certain blocks as “atomic in respect to coroutines” using C++11 attributes. Usage example follows: void f() { int yield; g(yield); [[bt::forbid_suspend]] { // Comment this call to make linter accept the code g(yield); t(); } } You can change bt::forbid_suspend to another identifier by tuning settings on the beginning of the script. The prefix forbid was inspired by Rust's linters[1] as you cannot disallow the linter from inside the forbid_suspend block. Some limitations follow: - A suspend point is identified by looking references to any id equals to yield in the last argument passed to function calls. It means that yield[ignored_ec] and alike will be correctly identified, but it needs to be named yield and it needs to be the last argument to the function call. - I haven't found a way to extract attributes related to COMPOUND_STMT nodes with clang API, so I manually look for token gaps and do a simple regex. It means you cannot use macros to [[bt::forbid_suspend]] as the macro won't be expanded. - You better call the script with '-x c++' and also ' -I/usr/lib/clang/5.0.1/include'. Like I've said in the beginning of the email, it's a *dumb* linter, which means it doesn't try to handle all cases. Therefore, I don't hope to do many changes to it or maintain it to work against newer releases of clang and I'm only uploading it to gist (not fullblow Github): < https://gist.github.com/vinipsmaker2/d930fbe5b7597432b021effe618da171>. It should also be easy to hack as it is very small. I'm releasing the linter under public domain. Enjoy. I have been using fibers in a daily basis on the last months of my job to solve networking problems on a gateway project. Some of the technologies I use are: - Boost.Asio and its spawn function. - A few custom synchronization primitives for the fibers (e.g. mutex, semaphore). - Eventually I'll have to write a custom spawn function that returns a joinable handle so I can kill the usage of a fiber::barrier in a few places. I've been using the linter for about a week already and looks fine. My use case are: - To prevent iterator invalidation in regions accessing shared variables. - To guarantee events order in algorithms that handle races (cannot yield while task YYY hasn't finished). The project I use it in is not an open source project, so I cannot talk much more about it. Also, I don't claim my solution is original. I wouldn't be surprised if the very same solution exists in the wild (please let me know if you know of a similar approach). This is not a new problem. It is know for some time. For instance, in P0171, Gor Nishanov noted this same problem: “In coroutines the suspend point is clearly marked with await, which tells the reader that something unusual happens in this function and allows the reader, for example, to confirm whether the lifetimes of the objects of interest align with the lifetime of the coroutine or not, whether some locks need to be acquired to protect some concurrently accessed data, and whether some locks need to be released before the execution reaches the suspend point.” — <http://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/p0171r0.html>, 2015 However, the solution he presented was to manually examine whole blocks of code without help from the compiler. I argue that the solution he presented is as error-prone as manually looking for exit paths that don't free acquired resources in languages lacking RAII. And I've been spoiled too much by RAII. Furthermore, I take this comment of his with highly suspicious look: “Since we are on the subject of maintenance nightmares, we would like to offer a conjecture that the absence of the await in P0114 is a likely source of many maintenance nightmares. Without a syntactic marker to signal to the person reading the code that something funny is going on, it is impossible to tell whether the following code is correct or not” — http://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/p0171r0.html If I had to give a vote to the proposal he was defending or Chris' proposal, I'd probably have chosen Chris'. [1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/attributes.html# lint-check-attributes -- Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira https://vinipsmaker.github.io/

2 3

Non-ASCII Path Names in Repo
by Tom Kent 25 May '19

25 May '19

In the last few days we've had a non-ASCII path name added to the repo: tools/boostdep/test/utf8-test-ßµ™∃ Which came with commit 8893d1c57951a [1] I noticed this because a python 2 script (calling shutil.copytree) I had running on windows that copied the repo around started to fail. I've long needed to update that script to python 3, and am working on this. However, I wanted to point this out to the list so we could discuss if there are any other ramifications of having a non-ascii path. I vaguely remember some discussion about something like this in the past, but couldn't find it via search. If this is already a settled topic, that's great. Tom [1] https://github.com/boostorg/boostdep/commit/8893d1c57951a4a83705ed203005576…

2 1

Re: [boost] [ Interest? ] [ out_ptr ] Tiny C++ Abstraction for C-Style Output Pointers
by Bjorn Reese 12 May '19

12 May '19

On 06/28/18 21:03, ThePhD via Boost wrote: > out_ptr is a small abstraction for making types such as > std::unique_ptr, std::shared_ptr, boost::shared_ptr, and the upcoming > std::retain_ptr > <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0468r0.html> work > work C-Style output functions as a parameter, addressing the need of > wanting to be able to do "my_c_api_init( foo, bar, &my_smart_ptr );". It's Does out_ptr have other use-cases than C interoperability?

7 14

[test] unit test command-line handling
by Stefan Seefeld 22 Mar '19

22 Mar '19

Hello, this is a question concerning the Boost.Test framework. I'd like to pass command-line arguments to my tests, and I'm unsure of how to proceed. I have found https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_68_0/libs/test/doc/html/boost_test/adv_sce…, which shows how to access the command-line programmatically, but that's declared obsolete, and it's also lacking some important info, such as how I should handle the argv vector. Are there any examples that demonstrate this use case ? Specifically: * What (non-deprecated) API can I use to access command-line arguments during test initialization ? * How does my own handling of command-line arguments interact with Boost.Test's own command-line argument handling ? Thanks, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

3 8

Reminder: 1.69 closes for major changes Wednesday
by Marshall Clow 10 Dec '18

10 Dec '18

Upcoming dates: * 31-Oct: Boost 1.69.0 closed for major code changes * 7-Nov: Boost 1.69.0 closed for beta * 14-Nov: Boost 1.69.0 beta 1 * 5-Dec: Boost 1.69.0 closed for release * 12-Dec: Boost 1.69.0 release -- The Boost Release Team

4 3

clang-win, (Thin)LTO this time
by degski 08 Nov '18

08 Nov '18

Starting new thread. Substantial progress has been made towards the goal of compiling Boost with Clang/LLVM (clang-cl.exe, targeting MSVC). The latest PR in this respect by Peter has achieved this. The next step is to be also able to use lld (lld-link in case of clang-cl.exe targeting MSVC) to generate the Boost-libs (static/dynamic). The main interest, IMO, is to be able to use LTO (Thin or Full), which is not possible without the use of LLD. A secondary benefit appears to be faster link times (info from the lld manual). In order to build static ThinLTO-enabled libs, it suffices to pass <compileflags>-flto=thin in the project jam file. The archiving, though, needs to be done with lld-link.exe, passing /lib as the first option (this way it will act as lib.exe, while being able to handle the llvm-byte-code [lib.exe finds the so generated .obj-files to be corrupt]). At consumption time of the libs, lld-link needs to be used for linking. Hacking clang-win.jam:156 to: toolset.flags clang-win.archive .LD $(cond) : "\"C:\\Program Files\\LLVM\\bin\\lld-link.exe\"" /lib ; achieves this goal. I would like to ask (probably Peter) to have a look into whether this can be achieved "the proper way", i.e. to programmatically set that particular line to the required value for this use-case. degski -- *“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" - Herbert Stein*

4 13

"peer reviewed" - Rights and responsibilities of maintainers
by Alexander Grund 07 Nov '18

07 Nov '18

I'm having trouble with a maintainer of a boost library over a PR and am seeking for clarification. Background (may be skipped): A bug was introduced into the library which I noticed in one of "my" (company) projects leading to a reproducible crash. However the scenario is not that common (although others have the same problem) so it wasn't noticed earlier. I analyzed the problem and created a minimum working example to reproduce this and then opened a PR with a fix. The maintainer did not comment on this for multiple months so given it IS complicated, I factored out additional PRs with tests I created to show the problem, so each PR is fairly small. In the result there were PRs with tests that failed on travis and the fix-PR which included the test-PRs and the fix and succeeded on travis (and all other CIs) and users reported success using this PR. Still no response from the maintainer on any PR. He then added an own test claiming to be enough, while I (as the author of the original tests) knew it wasn't as e.g. it didn't fail. (so what's it worth then?) Furthermore he added a commit changing unrelated stuff and ADDITIONALLY changing code I touched in the fix claiming that it would be the essence of my patch and fix the problems. Again I (as the author of the original patch) know that this is not true especially as the test-PRs still fail with his patch applied. So my point/problem is: Is the maintainer allowed to simply do changes as he wishes without any review at all? My expected procedure is: - Someone creates a PR - Maintainer (and optionally the community) reviews (and comments on) it - It eventually gets merged or rejected with comments why OR: - Someones else (including the maintainer) creates a contra-PR fixing the same problem - That author explains, how and why this fixes the same problem and why it is superior to the original PR - This gets reviewed and either PR gets merged Arguments were made, that this doesn't apply to accepted boost libraries as e.g. "it's [the maintainers] heads that got chopped off if something gets broken". I would challenge this by the simple example at hand: This boost library IS broken and it crashes MY application (and others). But I see no heads rolling. Furthermore: If the maintainer is allowed to patch and change as he wants without ANY review, how can Boost still be called "peer reviewed"? My trust in Boost stems from the extensive review a library has to undergo before it is included in Boost. If afterwards no review is happening or reviews are actively avoided (as in the current example), then the older a Boost library gets, the less trust I would have in it as more and more unreviewed changes get included. So again: What is the Boost course on reviews of existing libraries and the statement on the rights and responsibilities of maintainers? Thanks, Alexander Grund

15 52

[testing] Lots of spurious test runners
by John Maddock 05 Nov '18

05 Nov '18

There are rather a lot of test runners that fail all tests due to setup errors: sandia-gcc-5.4.0-c++11 cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option "-std=c++11" sandia-gcc-5.4.0-c++14 cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option "-std=c++14" sandia-gcc-6.4.0-c++11 cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option "-std=c++11" sandia-gcc-6.4.0-c++14 cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option "-std=c++14" sandia-intel-16.0-c++11 /bin/sh: line 1: icpc: command not found sandia-intel-16.0-c++14 /bin/sh: line 1: icpc: command not found sandia-intel-16.0 /bin/sh: line 1: icpc: command not found sandia-intel-17.0-c++11 /bin/sh: line 1: icpc: command not found sandia-intel-17.0-c++14 /bin/sh: line 1: icpc: command not found sandia-intel-17.0 /bin/sh: line 1: icpc: command not found teeks99-02-dc3.1-11-Docker-64on64 /usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.8/../../../../include/c++/4.8/functional:2194:2: error: no type named 'type' in 'std::enable_if<false, void>' (and more errors from <functional> - the compiler appears to be unable to handle the std lib headers so I'm not sure what the point of testing it is?) igaztanaga-develop-gcc-3.4c++03 cc1plus.exe: error: unrecognized command line option "-fvisibility-inlines-hidden" cc1plus.exe: error: unrecognized command line option "-fvisibility=hidden" Best, John. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

4 3

interest in a flag library
by Masse Nicolas 05 Nov '18

05 Nov '18

Hi all, This is the first time I post on this mailing list :). I'm posting because i'd like to know if people would be interested in a library to treat enum types as flags. I find that's something which is lacking in the language since the introduction of strongly typed enums, and I've since written some code in order to do this. So far I've seen some discussion on this mailing list about that, but it doesn't seems that any library have been written yet. So do you think it is worth the effort of porting and documenting my code so that it can integrated into boost, or not? Regards, Masse Nicolas. PS: For those interested, the code consists of a flag class, and overloads operators like '|' or &. It can be used like this: enum struct option : uint { none = 0, first = 1, second = 2, third = 4, forth = 8 }; static constexpr flags<option> var1 = option::first; static constexpr flags<option> var2 = option::second | option::third; static constexpr auto var3 = var1 | var2; /* type will be resolved into flags<option> */ static constexpr auto var4 = option::first | option::second | option::third; /* works too */ int main() { std::cout << var1 << std::endl; std::cout << static_cast<uint>(var2) << std::endl; /* note that static_cast<int> won't compile since the underlying type is uint */ std::cout << (var3 & option::forth) << std::endl; std::cout << (var3 == var4) << std::endl; return 0; }

8 9

Draft copy - Call for Submissions - CMake for Boost
by Robert Ramey 05 Nov '18

05 Nov '18

The following is a draft of the document of I have planned to post on behalf of Boost on or around 1 November 2018 as the first step in our next attempt to accommodate CMake in Boost. Robert Ramey Call for Submissions - CMake for Boost ====================================== For some time, there has been interest on many users and developers of Boost Libraries to make Boost easier to use with CMake. Discussions in the past have not resulted in an implementation which has been widely accepted. Never the less, hope springs eternal, and we intend to attempt this once again. It seems that often there are difficulties before such projects even start in that there are wide discrepancies as to what should be the goals and expectations of Boost support of CMake. The aim of this document is to try to build a consensus on this question before encouraging CMake developers and experts to submit proposals for Boost support of CMake. Requirements and Scope ====================== Requirements ------------ Submissions will fulfill the applicable requirements of any boost submission. This will include: a) any necessary code. b) specifications/requirements for things like directory structure and contents. b) A useful document. Document should provide information, examples and templates so that a typical C++ and CMake user should be able to do any of the following in a short time - say 10 minutes. Document at a minimum should be viewable as html and/or PDF file. 1) A library user should be able to incorporate a Boost Library into the CMake script. 2) A library user should be able to determine which additional Boost Libraries he needs. 3) A library developer should find it simple to create the requisite CMake files for his library. Thus the documentation should contain explanation and perhaps other means such as examples and/or "templates" for required CMake files. c) test of CMake facilities supported by the CMake implementation. This will include code, test of any features, capabilities that the submission provides. Users expect that if they follow the instructions in the documentation, they will get the promised results. A manner of proving this must be provided. A likely response to this requirement would be a "test project" which can be used to demonstrate that the submission actually works. This will be useful in the future for maintenance of the CMake Boost implementation. It will permit the maintainer of the Boost.CMake facility to work on and test their fixes and improvements without disrupting other developers and users. d) a Boost License Facilities and features ----------------------- CMake as it stands has lots of capabilities. But it has a fair amount of complexity as well. Lots of things can be accomplished in multiple different ways - each with subtly different results and effects. CMake for Boost will likely consist of documentation, examples, CMake code, and other stuff to use CMake to permit new features and facilities for users and developers of Boost libraries. What follows is a list of facilities that Boost users and developers would like to acquire with CMake for Boost. Those marked with * should be considered hard requirements. That is, submissions which don't include this feature can't be considered. Other items are interesting and would be considered if included in a submission. *a) incorporating selected Boost Libraries into a user's application *b) incorporating selected Boost Libraries into a user's library c) building a boost library d) building a boost tool such as Boost.bcp, Boost.boostdep, etc. e) testing a boost library - if testing of Boost libraries is to be supported, the following features should be considered. Those marked * should be considered essential. *1) execution tests - must pass/ must fail *2) compile only tests - must pass/ must fail *3) link only tests - must pass/ must fail 4) should be available to both users and developers 5) should not depend upon tools other than C++. 6) test should have the option of posting the results to some public "dashboard" 7) option for recursive testing and/or building of libraries might be nice. That is if library A uses library B and I test library A, this would automatically test library B beforehand. *f) In CMake, dependent libraries are specified as part of the library CMakeLists.txt files. There several ways to do this and the subject is pretty confusing to get right. Any submission documentation has to explain to library developers how do this. g) Some have suggested a highly automated process including downloading/updating, finding other components on other machines, etc. This shouldn't be considered h) packaging - preparation of distributable, installable files for various operating systems. That is support for the CPack facility. i) There has been a lot interest and work in automatically determining dependencies It's a much deeper subject than most people realize. Solving this problem is not a requirement of the submission. However, submitters are free to address this if they desire. *j) support of library modularity. This would mean: *1) independence of things outside the library directory structure. To wit - no presumption about any "super project". *2) building out of tree *3) no need for installing libraries not used by the build target k) ... Submission Rules and Procedures ------------------------------- a) This document constitutes a "Request for Submissions". It will be announced on the boost announcements list, boost developer's list, slack/boost, isocpp website and twitter account, reddit at r/cpp. Submissions will be open to anyone. b) Submissions will be accepted at an email address to be specified. Received submissions will receive a "prescreening" to determine that they meet the requirements specified for such submissions at the top of this document. Those that don't will be returned to the author. c) The name of the author of a submission will not be included in the submission. Authors will be expected to take reasonable efforts to maintain his anonymity via a github repo without a real name assigned, anonymous, email address etc. We understand that the nature of the submission and debate during subsequent review of the proposals. Never the less we believe that anonymity can be mostly maintained. The the true identity of the author of the selected proposal will not be revealed until the selection is made. The motivation for this anonymity is to attract submitters who find the boost review process distressing, annoying and/or unpleasant. It should also address the concerns of those who beleive that by not being a "boost insider" they won't get fair consideration. Boost is first and foremost a meritocracy. We seek the very best in everything regardless of other considerations. d) Submissions will be closed on or about 1 February 2019. Boost formal review will commence shortly there after. Depending on the number of submissions received, the process may last as long as month. e) As per the boost formal review rules and customs, some time after the review period terminates, the review manager will announce the review results. This will likely contain some conditions regarding alterations required in the submissions implementations. I the author find these too onerous, and declines the opportunity to integrate his submission as an official part of boost, the review manager may select an alternate submission. It's also possible that the review manager may decide to accept none of the submissions. f) when the submission is integrated into boost and is shown fulfill the requirements stipulated by the review manager. The author will receive a "prize" of $5000 and a large but cheap medal on a ribbon hopefully to be awarded at the next C++Now (Boost Con). As this is written, this prize is subject to finding a funding source. It's understood that this stipend is in no way compensation, for all the work and aggravation of this task. But we hope that it will serve as a tangible token of our gratitude for solving one of Boosts most pressing and difficult problems. Useful Resources =============== “Effective CMake" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsXLMQ6WgIk https://gist.github.com/mbinna/c61dbb39bca0e4fb7d1f73b0d66a4fd1 https://github.com/purpleKarrot/Boost.CMake https://steveire.wordpress.com/2016/08/21/boost-dependencies-and-bcp/

10 28

clang-win, again
by Peter Dimov 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Has anyone succeeded in getting clang-cl.exe working under b2? I've installed llvm-6.0.1, added it to PATH, put using clang-win : : : <compatibility>vc14 ; in my user-config, and what I get is: C:\boost-git\develop\libs\smart_ptr\test>b2 toolset=clang-win sp_interlocked_test warning: mismatched versions of Boost.Build engine and core warning: Boost.Build engine (b2) is 2015.07.00 warning: Boost.Build core (at C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src) is 2018.02-git C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/tools\msvc.jam:1087: in set-setup-command *** argument error * rule virtual-target.from-file ( file : file-loc : project ) * called with: ( : /C:/boost-git/develop/libs/smart_ptr/test : object(project-t arget)@129 ) * missing argument file C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\virtual-target.jam:970:see definition of rule 'virtual-target.from-file' being called C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/tools\msvc.jam:652: in clang-win.compile.c+ + C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/kernel\modules.jam:107: in modules.call-in C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/util\indirect.jam:105: in indirect.call C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\virtual-target.jam:902: in execute C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\virtual-target.jam:821: in class@acti on.actualize C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\virtual-target.jam:332: in actualize- action C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\virtual-target.jam:518: in actualize- no-scanner C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\virtual-target.jam:142: in class@virt ual-target.actualize C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\configure.jam:258: in try-find-build C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\configure.jam:396: in find-builds-raw C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\configure.jam:455: in configure.find- builds C:/boost-git/develop\boostcpp.jam:734: in boostcpp.deduce-address-model C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/kernel\modules.jam:107: in modules.call-in C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/util\indirect.jam:105: in indirect.call C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\property.jam:144: in property.evaluat e-conditionals-in-context C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\targets.jam:1087: in evaluate-require ments C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\targets.jam:1121: in common-propertie s2 C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\targets.jam:1017: in targets.common-p roperties C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\targets.jam:1313: in class@basic-targ et.generate C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\targets.jam:812: in generate-really C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src/build\targets.jam:784: in class@main-target .generate C:/boost-git/develop/tools/build/src\build-system.jam:797: in load C:\boost-git\develop\tools\build\src/kernel\modules.jam:295: in import C:\boost-git\develop\tools\build\src/kernel/bootstrap.jam:139: in boost-build C:\boost-git\develop\boost-build.jam:17: in module scope

9 74

[property-tree] state of the library, fixes and extensions
by Goehring, Christian 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Hi @all, the property-tree lib seems to be in some sort of dormant state judging from the repository activity. Is this library still actively maintained (for example, the xml-functionality would need some support for CData)? Do you know if there is any need for extensions (for example JSON-support) or did some other alternative succeed this library? Thanks in advance! Best, Christian

1 0

questions regarding visibility and b2
by Robert Ramey 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

I've got a few questions about the "visibility" changes for boost. My understanding is that "visibility" for gcc and clang are "sort of the same thing" as dll import and export are for windows. Now we've made "visibility" the "default". But this seems kind of weird. This has been made a b2 feature. In order to run tests, this feature is applied to the b2 command line. What's weird is that it's applied to the tests/executables and propogated down to libraries which are built. I actually don't know what "visibility" means in the context of building and executable. If I want to use visibility=global then on the library build, it needs to be applied to everything. It's very weird and doesn't seem in line with the windows solution. Heretofore, I've applied visibility to the library build "by hand" by adding the appropriate command line switches to the right places. I'm aware that this is not the b2 way. But the b2 way doesn't seem to make sense to me. On the bright side, changing default visibility didn't seem to have any effect on the serialization library other than on one test. Unfortunately, turning this confused a pending issue and made it even more contentious than it already is/was. FWIW - this is not so much the fault of b2 or anyone in particular. The use of DLLS/shared libraries is the triumph of development over design by vendors, each of whom do their own thing and have never been able to get it together. By now this has created enough technical debt that it will take years to straighten out if people actually start to address it, which no one seems interest in doing. Anyway, the b2 approach is pretty confusing and probably wrong. I'm also guessing that, as one would predict, a change like this is going to provoke subtle failures in lots of small corners which will take quite a while to discover. I'm not sure how to address this. Robert Ramey

4 5

[release] 1.69.0 deadline for new libraries approaching
by Marshall Clow 29 Oct '18

29 Oct '18

It's that time again! On Wednesday, the master branch will be closed for adding new libraries. Upcoming dates: * 24-Oct: Boost 1.69.0 closed for new libraries and breaking changes * 31-Oct: Boost 1.69.0 closed for major code changes * 7-Nov: Boost 1.69.0 closed for beta * 14-Nov: Boost 1.69.0 beta 1 * 5-Dec: Boost 1.69.0 closed for release * 12-Dec: Boost 1.69.0 release -- The Boost Release Team

7 10

Is boost supported on z/os
by Naveen Sharma 28 Oct '18

28 Oct '18

Hello Does boost supported on z/os or may be subset of library. We are planning to replace our current library with boost. One of the platform we support is z/os and so I am researching if boost can be compiled and usable on the platform. I did searched on the internet but did not get much information. Before I dive into it, I thought to ask. Thanks Naveen

2 2

Re: [boost] [histogram] Objections against switch to C++14?
by Bjorn Reese 28 Oct '18

28 Oct '18

On 10/22/18 6:42 PM, Hans Dembinski wrote: > Do you object against raising the requirement from C++11 to C++14 for the implementation of boost.histogram? No objection from my side. However, you may consider making parts of the library available to C++11 users, because there are plenty of those out there.

1 0

Builds from boost/status fail early?
by James E. King III 27 Oct '18

27 Oct '18

Using develop from this morning (tried various combinations of these three options...): boost@d48d3305d4b4:/boost/status$ ../b2 toolset=clang variant=release cxxstd=03 ... /boost/tools/build/src/build/feature.jam:491: in validate-value-string from module feature error: "shared:" is not a known value of feature <link> error: legal values: "shared" "static" /boost/tools/build/src/build/feature.jam:365: in expand-subfeatures-aux from module feature /boost/tools/build/src/build/feature.jam:422: in expand-subfeatures from module feature /boost/tools/build/src/build/feature.jam:871: in feature.expand from module feature /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:1103: in evaluate-requirements from module targets /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:1121: in common-properties2 from module targets /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:1017: in targets.common-properties from module targets /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:1313: in class(a)basic-target.generate from module object(typed-target)@47912 /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:812: in generate-really from module object(main-target)@70272 /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:784: in class(a)main-target.generate from module object(main-target)@70272 /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:273: in class(a)project-target.generate from module object(project-target)@47307 /boost/tools/build/src/build/targets.jam:273: in class(a)project-target.generate from module object(project-target)@4568 /boost/tools/build/src/build-system.jam:797: in load from module build-system /boost/tools/build/src/kernel/modules.jam:295: in import from module modules /boost/tools/build/src/kernel/bootstrap.jam:139: in boost-build from module /boost/boost-build.jam:17: in module scope from module

3 12

[statechart] visibility change broke things
by James E. King III 27 Oct '18

27 Oct '18

Boost.StateChart wasn't building on a regular basis. It looks like the visibility changes broke it. I opened an issue for it. I also changed Travis CI to build it monthly.

1 0

[serialization] boost:array
by Yuval Lifshitz 27 Oct '18

27 Oct '18

Any idea on why was the serializer for boost:array removed?Can we re-introduce it? Yuval Lifshitz

1 0

Fwd: Syntax highlighting for Boost.Jam language in Visual Studio Code
by Mateusz Loskot 27 Oct '18

27 Oct '18

I've announced this on boost-build but I think folks here may find it useful as well. Mat ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Mateusz Loskot <mateusz(a)loskot.net> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018, 23:18 Subject: Syntax highlighting for Boost.Jam language in Visual Studio Code To: <boost-build(a)lists.boost.org> Hi, (A pet project warning!) I've published an extension for VSCode with a brave attempt to color-hightlight syntax of Jam language: https://github.com/mloskot/vscode-boost-jam This is based on a very basic TextMate language grammar definitions, often naive, and, by no means, it is complete or bug-free coverage of the Jam. Even so, I think it quite helps to de-annoy or even enjoy process of writing Jam scrips :-) I'm no expert of writing TextMate language grammars - this is my first ever attempt - so chances are I may be incapable of fixing bugs or improving it with advanced features. Especially, that "the process of writing a TextMate language grammar remains poorly documented" - http://www.apeth.com/nonblog/stories/textmatebundle.html Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

1 0

Mailman upgrade
by Brad Johnson 27 Oct '18

27 Oct '18

Happy Late October all. Just a quick notification that mailman upgraded from 2.1.26 -> 2.1.29 at 27-Oct-2018 02:50 UTC. Release notes for 2.1.27, 2.1.28, and 2.1.29: https://launchpad.net/mailman/2.1/2.1.27 https://launchpad.net/mailman/2.1/2.1.28 https://launchpad.net/mailman/2.1/2.1.29 Sanity checks on test mailing list shows mail is still flowing and archiving. Any questions or concerns, please let me know at this address or sysadmin(a)boost.org. Thanks, -- Brad Johnson Ciere Consulting 916.877.6030 brad.johnson(a)ciere.com ciere.com

1 0

[parameter_python] Merge to master
by Edward Diener 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

I would like to merge parameter_python to 'master' from 'develop'. Does anybody see anything wrong with this ? This fixes using Python 3+ with parameter as well as Python 2+, among other things.

3 4

Library devs only: Boost v2.x distro design questions
by Niall Douglas 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

Splitting this off from the other thread, can I get feedback from Boost library maintainers ONLY. Not users, not non-maintainers. Q0: Are you willing to do the work to adapt your library for any Boost v2.x distro if it were to happen? Q1: Would you prefer a new, separate Boost v2.x distro in parallel to the v1.x distro, or to keep everything within one v1.x distro? Q2: Would you be intending to keep your library inside Boost v1.x, move it exclusively to Boost v2.x, or have it exist in both Boost v1.x and v2.x but with different defaults configured? Also, would the version in v1.x be hard forked from any v2.x edition i.e. the v1.x edition would get orphaned? Q3: What C++ standard should Boost v2.x's master build system be defaulted to? C++ 11, 14, 17 or 20? Q4: Should Boost v2.x use a boost2 namespace, or namespace boost { inline namespace v2 { }}? (This affects whether Boost v2 and v1 editions of your library can be used within the same translation unit) Q5: What master buildsystem should Boost v2.x use? Boost.Build, cmake, Build2, something else? Q6: Should Boost v2.x's libraries auto integrate individually into some package manager? If so, which ones do you intend to support? Q7: Should Boost v2.x have official release versions done by release managers, or should it be a rolling release of "whatever last passed the CI @ 100%"? Note that you can have this, and have official release versions of "especially known good" editions too. Q8: Should Boost v2.x use a local HTML server to serve documentation, and the static HTML docs be dispensed with as a requirement? Q9: What are your feelings towards the use of Python to script infrastructure and tooling in any Boost v2.x? For example, Python to run a local HTML server to serve documentation locally, or Python to build a release etc Q10: What parts of core Boost are you utterly dependent upon, and would absolutely need ported to any Boost v2.x as no STL alternatives exist? I could go on, but let's stop there for now. Niall

12 16

[histogram] Objections against switch to C++14?
by Hans Dembinski 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

Dear reviewers of boost.histogram, thank you again for your reviews. I am currently working on the issues raised during the review and some of the requested features would be easier to implement when the library standard is raised from C++11 to C++14. This only affects the implementation side, not the user side. It would make my life easier and the implementation code more readable, because I can emulate `if constexpr` using in-place generic lambdas instead of out-of-place functors in the detail namespace. To make the library more user-friendly, I have to do more and more of these emulated `if constexpr`. Do you object against raising the requirement from C++11 to C++14 for the implementation of boost.histogram? Best regards, Hans

3 3

[smart_ptr] sharable_ptr any interest
by Marc Pawlowsky 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

I am working on a idea for a smart pointer called sharable_ptr. A cross between a unique_ptr and a shared_ptr. A sharable pointer has a single definite owner like a unique_ptr, and can be shared to other users similar to shared_ptr as a borrowed_ptr. However unlike a shared_ptr it is an error if the contents of the sharable_ptr go out of scope, by destruction or being reset or assigned, if there are still instances of a borrowed_ptr that reference it. The work is in its infancy at https://github.com/marcpawl/smart_ptr/tree/feature/leased_ptr with the documentation at https://github.com/marcpawl/smart_ptr/blob/feature/leased_ptr/doc/smart_ptr… >From the documentation: Motivation sharable_ptr, and its cohorts: sharable_ref, borrowed_ptr, and borrowed_ref are to help close the raw dangling pointer problem. Along with unique_ptr and shared_ptr, the number of C++ objects that will retain a raw pointer can be reduced. It will allow for easier reasoning of the lifespan of objects, and help catch errors where an object is referenced after it no longer should be. <https://github.com/marcpawl/smart_ptr/blob/feature/leased_ptr/doc/smart_ptr…> Analogy Marc owns a cottage on the lake and is willing to share it with his friends and family. He tells them to drop by anytime they want, even when he is not there. Amanda uses the cottage on a regular basis. Amanda also lets her friend Ava use it. Unfortunately due to a change in financial circumstances Marc has to sell the cottage. At this point neither Marc nor Amanda may use the cottage any more. In C++ terms, Marc has a sharable_ptr<Cottage>. When Amanda is at the cottage she has a borrowed_ptr<Cottage>, which she destroys when she leaves the cottage. When Amanda lets Ava use the cottage Ava gets a copy of the borrowed_ptr. Amanda and Ava must destroy their pointers prior to Marc releasing his. It would be an error for Amanda or Ava to retain a borrowed_ptr to the cottage even if she does not use it. Equivalent to retaining a copy of the keys. ## Alternatives Instead of using `sharable_ptr` and `borrowed_ptr`, you could use `shared_ptr` and `weak_ptr`. The error detection for a dangling pointer gets pushed to when the `weak_ptr` is locked to a `shared_ptr`, instead of when the owned object is freed. A possible advantage is that if the `weak_ptr` is not used then there is no error. The disadvantage is the code may have progressed quite a way before it is realized the referenced object no longer exists. Is there interest in this idea, should I keep working on it? I have so far only been working on Mac clang basement:smart_ptr marcpawl$ clang -v Apple LLVM version 10.0.0 (clang-1000.10.44.2) Target: x86_64-apple-darwin17.7.0 Thread model: posix Thanks Marc Pawlowsky

2 1

interest in a flag library
by Marc Pawlowsky 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

You should take a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fwbG5TyI18 CPPCON 2018 session https://cppcon2018.sched.com/event/FnKQ/avoiding-disasters-with-strongly-ty… Arno Lepisk <https://cppcon2018.sched.com/speaker/arno_lepisk> Avoiding Disasters with Strongly Typed C++ I think the technique he describes is what you are looking for.

1 0

[c++ question] detecting reference to temporaries
by Raffi Enficiaud 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

I have a stupid question related to a bug in boost.test. A piece of code is doing something like: const value& get() { return *internal_iterator; // can be a ref or not to value or another type } The fix is trivial, *but* I want to test it. Is there any technique that would let me test for reference to temporaries? The only option I see would be to promote compiler warnings into error, but maybe there is something there? Thanks, Raffi (complete example here: https://github.com/boostorg/test/blob/90d577a620e008417af79f5caa25e701eef95… )

2 1

[boost.random] Library maintenance
by Nikita Kniazev 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

Random library has multiple PRs that hang for a long time already. Some of them address warnings that poisons its usage and maintenance of other libraries. Please consider placing Random under CMT. https://github.com/boostorg/random/pull/35 https://github.com/boostorg/random/pull/26 https://github.com/boostorg/random/pull/31

1 0

Re: [boost] [c++ question] detecting reference to temporaries
by Nikita Kniazev 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

> Is there any technique that would let me test for reference to > temporaries? The only option I see would be to promote compiler warnings > into error, but maybe there is something there? AddressSanitizer with -fsanitize-address-use-after-scope https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/AddressSanitizerUseAfterScope

1 0

Boost 2 and build2
by Boris Kolpackov 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

I've noticed the discussion on Boost 2 where build2 was mentioned as one of the potential build systems. So I wanted to say that we would be happy to help on our side with any questions, missing features (like exporting targets in a CMake-compatible manner, as mentioned by Niall), etc. Also a couple of additional points about build2 that I think could be relevant to Boost 2 (or 1): 1. It is currently the only build system that I am aware of that has support for C++ modules (currently TS but we are tracking the standardization/implementation progress closely; see [1] for details). Now that modules are likely to be in C++20 I think this should be at least a consideration for Boost 2. 2. We have a public CI service[2] for open source project that I think could be quite useful to Boost. It might not currently be as extensive as Boost's (see [3] for the currently offered build configurations) but we are continuously expanding it plus Boost can run its own build machines with additional configurations. 3. build2 comes with a package manager[4] and Boost could take advantage of that by either publishing to cppget.org or running its own package repository (or both). I am happy to answer any questions here (if appropriate, of course), on the build2 mailing list[5], or on the #build2 slack channel[6]. [1] https://build2.org/build2/doc/build2-build-system-manual.xhtml#cxx-modules [2] https://ci.cppget.org [3] https://ci.cppget.org/?build-configs [4] https://build2.org/build2-toolchain/doc/build2-toolchain-intro.xhtml#guide-… [5] https://lists.build2.org/ [6] https://cpplang.slack.com/app_redirect?channel=build2

1 0

The future and present of Boost
by Robert Ramey 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

This was on another thread. Someone mentioned that it should be on it's own thread so here it is (slightly amended for context). For some time I've been concerned about the future of Boost as an organization. Here are the concerns I have: a) With C++11, the standards committee accepted a large portion of Boost into the standard. This left it unclear as to what the future value of Boost to C++ might be. b) The standards committee has ramped up it's efforts to include library proposals directly into the standard - thus side stepping the traditional requirement of "standardizing established practice". So this has left Boost, which helps to evolve "establish practice" outside of the development of the C++. An example of this has been the Ranges library which as been designed and developed totally within confines of the C++ standards committee. This effectively marginalizes Boost - that is, makes it less relevant and important. c) This effort by the committee is basically failing. It's creating the possibility that C++ will evolve into an ever larger and incomprehensible bag of disjoint features than it already is. It makes it much harder to learn C++. This puts C++ on a slow train to oblivion. This is not unusual with successful projects which expand their scope - as the committee has done. It's especially common for organizations run as a committee. Think large corporations: Kodak, Sears, All government organizations, universities - etc. All one has to do to see this is look at the papers list for the San Diego meeting. Also look at P0977r0. Consider that it take the committee 10 years for a proposal to evolve into something that can be delivered to users. It even takes 10 years to include something which is already in use by 100's of thousands of programmers - ASIO. Of course the C++ committee won't address the situation. Committees don't do that. They think they can remain relevant by expanding scope. and lo and behold, now they want to expand scope again to include tooling. Wake up and smell the coffee people. Learn to prioritize and limit the scope of your actions to that which only you can do. This would be better for C++. Do less - get more done! d) Boost can accept, review and deliver a new library in a year. Hence Boost has a reason to continue and exist. But Boost is also a committee - albeit a better designed one. It has to evolve as well. I think it can evolve if we continue to work on the stuff we've been successful at while at the same time experimenting with new ideas. Robert Ramey

23 70

warning: non-free usage requirements <threading>multi ignored
by blubee blubeeme 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

Hello I am trying to build boost from git clone I run bootstrap.sh with these flags ```shell ./bootstrap.sh \ --prefix=/usr/local \ --with-toolset=clang \ --with-icu=/usr/local \ --with-python=python27 \ ``` After boostrapping I append ```shell "using mpi ;" >> ./project-config.jam ``` There's two issues with that 1)icu isn't found even though icu headers are in /usr/local/unicode/ 2)I get this this warning ```error warning: non-free usage requirements <threading>multi ignored warning: in main-target boost_mpi_python at libs/mpi/build/Jamfile.v2:144 ``` Which I tracked down to this issue: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/explicitly-specified-values-of-non-free-… That thread leaves the issue unresolved and just throws a warning instead of failing. ```shell ./bjam \ --prefix=/usr/local \ --layout=system \ -d4 \ --toolset=clang \ --build-dir=./build \ --stagedir=/opt/boost \ -j4 \ include=/usr/local/include/unicode \ link=shared \ threading=multi \ stage \ ``` bjam output ```shell Performing configuration checks - default address-model : 64-bit - default architecture : x86 - symlinks supported : yes - C++11 mutex : yes - lockfree boost::atomic_flag : no - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_auto_declarations : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_constexpr : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_defaulted_functions : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_final : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_hdr_mutex : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_hdr_tuple : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_lambdas : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_noexcept : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_nullptr : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_rvalue_references : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_template_aliases : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_thread_local : yes - Boost.Config Feature Check: cxx11_variadic_templates : yes - has_icu builds : yes warning: non-free usage requirements <threading>multi ignored warning: in main-target mpi at project-config.jam:42 warning: non-free usage requirements <threading>multi ignored warning: in main-target boost_mpi at libs/mpi/build/Jamfile.v2:119 - zlib : yes - bzip2 : yes - lzma : yes - zstd : no - iconv (libc) : yes - icu : no - icu (lib64) : no - xlocale supported : yes - native-atomic-int32-supported : yes - native-syslog-supported : yes - pthread-supports-robust-mutexes : yes - compiler-supports-ssse3 : yes - compiler-supports-avx2 : yes - gcc visibility : yes - long double support : no warning: non-free usage requirements <threading>multi ignored warning: in main-target boost_mpi_python at libs/mpi/build/Jamfile.v2:144 - libbacktrace builds : no - addr2line builds : yes - WinDbg builds : no - WinDbgCached builds : no - BOOST_COMP_GNUC >= 4.3.0 : no Component configuration: - atomic : building - chrono : building - container : building - context : building - contract : building - coroutine : building - date_time : building - exception : building - fiber : building - filesystem : building - graph : building - graph_parallel : building - iostreams : building - locale : building - log : building - math : building - mpi : building - program_options : building - python : building - random : building - regex : building - serialization : building - stacktrace : building - system : building - test : building - thread : building - timer : building - type_erasure : building - wave : building ``` I do have a working installation of openmpi installed in /usr/local and mpicxx is in my path from following the directions here: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_64_0/doc/html/mpi/getting_started.html#mpi… in the end the build errors out ```shell 0.003049 sec system; 0.000000 sec user; 3.078255 sec clock Using shell: /bin/sh -c argv[0] = '/bin/sh' argv[1] = '-c' argv[2] = ' ln -f -s 'libboost_wave.so.1.69.0' '/wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/boost-devel/work/stage/lib/libboost_wave.so' ' ln-UNIX /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/boost-devel/work/stage/lib/libboost_wave.so ln -f -s 'libboost_wave.so.1.69.0' '/wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/boost-devel/work/stage/lib/libboost_wave.so' 0.001905 sec system; 0.000000 sec user; 1.957884 sec clock ...failed updating 86 targets... ...skipped 17 targets... ...updated 1147 targets... *** [do-build] Error code 1 make: stopped in /usr/ports/devel/boost-devel 1 error ``` two questions: 1) How do I solve the non-free usage requirements warning 2) Why isn't icu being picked up? github issue:: https://github.com/boostorg/boost/issues/210

1 0

Library devs only: Boost v2.x distro design questions
by Niall Douglas 24 Oct '18

24 Oct '18

Splitting this off from the other thread, can I get feedback from Boost library maintainers ONLY. Not users, not non-maintainers. Q0: Are you willing to do the work to adapt your library for any Boost v2.x distro if it were to happen? Q1: Would you prefer a new, separate Boost v2.x distro in parallel to the v1.x distro, or to keep everything within one v1.x distro? Q2: Would you be intending to keep your library inside Boost v1.x, move it exclusively to Boost v2.x, or have it exist in both Boost v1.x and v2.x but with different defaults configured? Also, would the version in v1.x be hard forked from any v2.x edition i.e. the v1.x edition would get orphaned? Q3: What C++ standard should Boost v2.x's master build system be defaulted to? C++ 11, 14, 17 or 20? Q4: Should Boost v2.x use a boost2 namespace, or namespace boost { inline namespace v2 { }}? (This affects whether Boost v2 and v1 editions of your library can be used within the same translation unit) Q5: What master buildsystem should Boost v2.x use? Boost.Build, cmake, Build2, something else? Q6: Should Boost v2.x's libraries auto integrate individually into some package manager? If so, which ones do you intend to support? Q7: Should Boost v2.x have official release versions done by release managers, or should it be a rolling release of "whatever last passed the CI @ 100%"? Note that you can have this, and have official release versions of "especially known good" editions too. Q8: Should Boost v2.x use a local HTML server to serve documentation, and the static HTML docs be dispensed with as a requirement? Q9: What are your feelings towards the use of Python to script infrastructure and tooling in any Boost v2.x? For example, Python to run a local HTML server to serve documentation locally, or Python to build a release etc Q10: What parts of core Boost are you utterly dependent upon, and would absolutely need ported to any Boost v2.x as no STL alternatives exist? I could go on, but let's stop there for now. Niall

2 4

Re: [boost] [release] 1.69.0 deadline for new libraries approaching
by Peter Dimov 24 Oct '18

24 Oct '18

> Robert Ramey wrote: > > On 10/22/18 10:19 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote: > > > Marshall Clow wrote: > > > > > >> * 24-Oct: Boost 1.69.0 closed for new libraries and breaking changes > > > > > > OK... do we want CMake config files installed by 1.69 or not, then? > > > > I'd like to know this as well. If so, I presume that we can consider > > the Boost/CMake issues resolved and we can just move on from this? > > I doubt it. The CMake issue is much bigger than this. To expand on that: The Boost/CMake issues concern four scenarios: 1. CMake users who want to use a pre-built Boost from CMake, after installing it either with `b2 install`, as usual, or via some other mechanism; 2. CMake users who want to use Boost (or an individual Boost library) from CMake without building it with b2 and installing it, but as a subproject, built by CMake; 3. Building and installing Boost with CMake, replacing the current Boost.Build building/installing infrastructure; 4. Testing Boost with CMake, replacing the current Boost.Build testing infrastructure. Installing CMake config files as part of `b2 install` falls into scenario number 1. Boost is still built with Boost.Build as always, it's just that in addition to libboost_foo.a, the user also gets libboost_foo.cmake, which allows him to do `find_package(boost_foo)` from his CMakeLists.txt file. Nothing more than that. This doesn't affect, doesn't target, and doesn't address, scenarios 2-4 at all.

8 25

boost-cmake and quickbook
by Raffi Enficiaud 23 Oct '18

23 Oct '18

On 23.10.18 21:29, Edward Diener via Boost wrote: > On 10/23/2018 2:36 PM, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote: >> On 10/23/18 11:17 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote: >>> Robert Ramey wrote: >>> >>>> And I place the html and pdf versions into the repo so users don't have to build it. >>> >>> Placing the .html/pdf files into the repo is one - unquestionably modular - way to do it, but it does have its downsides. >> >> Both true. >> >> downside >> - "wastes" a lot of space >> - redundant - docs could get out sync with the code. >> >> >> upside >> >> - current documentation is always available to the user. In the two libraries of mine - documentation is an important part and I don't think the either would be usable without them. >> - only needs to be built on one machine no hassle for users >> - document build doesn't have to be "portable" >> - potential users can easily browse the documentation before they clone/download the package. This works well with github. I think this is very valuable - especialy for safe_numerics which most people don't actually see the need for. Call it a sales tool. > > I am sure you know that github already has support for viewing the documentation via the github io mechanism, so your last '-' item is not really applicable to your argument. > > My argument is simply that lots and lots of libraries use Boost Build to generate the docs, very often through the quickbook -> docbook -> pdf/html mechanism and unless we are going to continue to do it that way when Boost uses CMake we will eventually need a way to duplicate the Boost Build mechanism for creating the docs in CMake. > > Nonetheless I continue to believe that the move to CMake by Boost should be achieved in small steps, so that we can assure success in one step for all libraries before we even think about attempting the next. I still have the same fear that trying to accomplish everything at one time will mean that nothing really will ever get done. I only added item 5) to Peter's list because that is something we will eventually have to decide about. [sorry for multiple posting] Talking about small steps, feel free to copy paste this wherever you need it: https://github.com/raffienficiaud/boost-cmake/blob/master/boost-cmake/quick… I compiled Boost.Test documentation with this, this is fully cmake and it does the catalog generation on the fly. This is a small step, usually this is where collaboration starts, since I do not have all the knowledge of quickbook/docbook nor the bandwidth ATM. *But* if somebody is kind enough to assist me on this, in particular explaining me if we would want --stringparam chunk.first.sections "1" --stringparam chunk.section.depth "4" --stringparam generate.section.toc.level "3" --stringparam html.stylesheet "boostbook.css" --stringparam toc.max.depth "3" --stringparam toc.section.depth "10" to be exposed when compiling a documentation, or how to run the doxygen part, then porting things to cmake will be definitely faster. Raffi _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

[preprocessor] vc++ using the experimental preprocessor
by Edward Diener 23 Oct '18

23 Oct '18

I have updated on the 'develop' branch Boost PP code that will use the vc++ C++ standard conforming preprocessor in VS2017 15.8 and above, as explained at https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2018/07/06/msvc-preprocessor-progre…. The code essentially treats vc++ in this mode as a strictly standard conforming preprocessor. There is the switch of /experimental:preprocessor which turns on the new preprocessor for the end-user, else the normal non-standard vc++ preprocessor is still the current default. BTW I tried to post a comment to the link above, explaining that the test posted in the article for the new preprocessor was wrong, but for whatever reason it never was actually posted as a comment. Nonetheless I got it right for myself in the Boost PP code in its config.hpp, so I am not going to worry about the fact that others may use the erroneous test in the article in their code. The change I made to Boost PP does not affect any other compiler, including vc++ in normal non-standard preprocessor mode. I have no idea if any regression tests for msvc-14.1 are made with this /experimental:preprocessor switch, but I will wait for 'develop' to cycle through before merging to 'master' in Boost PP. My preprocessor tests show four failures with the new vc++ preprocessor. Two of the failures are based on the fact that the test code expects a macro called with the wrong number of arguments to produce a compiler error and not just a warning. But since I have been told, vis-a-vis the same situation occurring for the Oracle C ++ compiler, that compilers are allowed under the C++ standard to produce a warning and just "chug" on, even if producing macro output that is certainly not what the programmer intended, rather than produce a compilation error maybe I just need to eliminate those tests, as important as I think they are. The other two failures are with the BOOST_PP_ITERATE macro and corresponding structures. The new preprocessor also erroneously continues to give a number of argument mismatch warnings in cases where it does not really exist, similar to the non-standard preprocessor, but since it "chugs" on despite the false warnings it ends up producing the correct output anyway. I have already posted a bug report about the fact that the new preprocessor gives a warning and continues when a macro is called with the wrong number of arguments. The other problem with BOOST_PP_ITERATE will be harder to determine because the iterate mechanism in Boost PP is fairly complex and I will need to figure out what is causing it and reduce the failure to a much simpler form in order to report it. As far as the compiler warnings of the wrong number of arguments when they do not exist, again I will have to try and figure out why and report the bug(s) to Microsoft. If anyone wants to try this out on Boost PP 'develop' feel free to do so. You will need to invoke the msvc-14.1 toolset in Boost Build with the /experimental:preprocessor switch and you will need to upgrade VS2017 to 15.8 or above. You can tell whether you have succeeded invoking the Boost PP tests with the new preprocessor by looking at the run output of the config_info test. If the BOOST_PP_CONFIG_FLAGS() is 0x0001 it is the new preprocessor, else it is the default non-standard preprocessor (0x0004).

6 13

Invitation to join the C++ chat community!
by Vinnie Falco 23 Oct '18

23 Oct '18

All: Hi there. I would like to personally invite all of the Boost authors, participants on the mailing list, and interested parties to join the most popular C++ Slack workspace, where many lively technical discussions related to C++ and its ecosystem take place. There are channels for everyone, especially the #boost channel, but also channels for WG21 committee discussions such as #future_standard and #wg21. There's even an #sg14 ! You can learn more and request a free invitation here: <http://slack.cpp.al> This workspace is sponsored by the C++ Alliance, a non-profit organization which promotes and advances the C++ language and provides educational resources. Find out more about the Alliance here: <http://cpp.al> Regards

3 5

Development Calendar is empty
by James E. King III 23 Oct '18

23 Oct '18

When is the next freeze or release? https://www.boost.org/development/index.html - Jim

5 5

[histogram] Finalising version for submission
by Hans Dembinski 22 Oct '18

22 Oct '18

Hi all, I have a general question regarding the submission process on how to deal with extensions of the library. I am currently working on the points raised in the review. Clearly, the bugs need to be fixed and the documentation improved where it was lacking. So the procedure is clear in that regard, but the final version to be included in Boost will also have more features, the main ones are: - support for profiles and in general arbitrary accumulators as bin "counter" types - in particular any Boost.Accumulator - allow arbitrary metadata (or no metadata at all) to be associated with the builtin axes types, instead of just supporting a string label (the metadata type will be a template parameter) - use axis types through a traits-interface to make adding custom axis types really easy (a minimal axis only needs to implement `int operator()(something) const` and `unsigned size() const`, everything else is optional) - use storage types through a traits-interface to allow arbitrary STL and Boost containers as storage backends - add a support library for typical calculations done with histograms, like reducing a high-dimensional histogram to a lower-dimensional histogram, shrink an axis, etc - growing axes that increase the number of bins while the histogram is filled I started working on these features and switching to C++14 would simplify the implementation a lot, thanks to generic lambdas and return type deduction. So I would like to raise the requirement for the final library from C++11 to C++14. Since these are substantial changes, is another formal review of the final version required? In any case, I will request informal feedback on the final version on the list before histogram is released with Boost for the first time. Best regards, Hans

5 10

[all] Hidden visibility is on by deafult
by Antony Polukhin 22 Oct '18

22 Oct '18

Good news everyone! I'd like to announce that now Boost libraries are build with hidden visibility by deafult. Many thanks to Andrey Semashev for providing the required patches and PR to fix some builds, and to Glen Fernandes for merging. Separate thanks to all the Boosters who reported/fixed visibility related issues.

3 2

[review][histogram] Histogram Review Results
by Mateusz Loskot 22 Oct '18

22 Oct '18

Hi Everyone, Please, welcome the Histogram library to the Boost collection! Thank you Hans for submitting a high-quality library for review. Thank you to the reviewers as well as those who just exchanged their comments on numerous aspects of the library and participated in the fruitful discussions. Among reviewers, we can recognise veteran Boost contributors and authors as well as experts in the fields of statistics, raster analysis, including authors of histogram-oriented software packages. ---------------------------------------- Official reviews and votes: ---------------------------------------- 1. Klemens David Morgenstern - ACCEPT 2. Jim Pivarski (off-list) - ACCEPT 3. Bjorn Reese - ACCEPT conditionally 4. Steven Watanabe - ACCEPT conditionally 5. Alex Hagen-Zanker - ACCEPT Non-review participations: 1. Andrea Bocci (off-list) 2. degski 3. Glen Fernandes (off-list) 4. Gavin Lambert 5. Seth 6. Mateusz Loskot ---------------------------------------- Acceptance conditions ---------------------------------------- Two reviews stated conditions which are important fulfilled: Bjorn Reese - Reference documentation is finalized Steven Watanabe - Various exception safety and memory issues must be fixed. - The reference documentation must be completed. Specifically, various preconditions, requirements, and assumptions must be made explicit. I believe those are not controversial at all and Hans is also interested in addressing those requests. ---------------------------------------- Concerns and comments ---------------------------------------- Jim Pivarski mentioned importance of profile plots as fundamental enough that they should be part of the feature set. In short term, the profile plots can be implemented as a new storage type, using the extension capabilities. Similarly, some concurrent applications would need atomic-valued bins, but these, too, can be storage types. Bjorn Reese pointed out some aspects of the design that makes the library not work very well with STL algorithms. Bjorn strongly recommended that the default storage policy is changed to remove some of those limitations. Steven Watanabe provided Hans with large number of very detailed comments and fixes (eg. do not call destructor which has been fixed), suggestions how to improve run-fail tests and serialization tests. Alex Hagen-Zanker commented that range-based for-loops support could be improved, suggested to provide separate ranges or views for certain histogram access scenarios. Another important theme of Alex' review was Histogram applicability for moving window type analysis. Then, Alex requested clarification on choosing variance based on the Poisson distribution instead of the binomial distribution. degski suggested to look for some "low hanging fruits" in C++14 and/or C++17, the library could potentially benefit from, pushing the 'modern C++' trait of the library even further. Gavin Lambert suggested to allow use of quantity types like Boost.Units. Glen Fernandes mentioned he would raise allocator model support issues or relaxing the requirement that the pointer must be a raw pointer of type value_type*. Glen mentioned he may even be available to help. Hans has already addressed many of the suggestions and issues or planned related features for future releases of the library. Issues resulting from the feedback received during the review can be tracked and further discussed on GitHub, labelled with boost-review: https://github.com/HDembinski/histogram/labels/boost-review ---------------------------------------- The Upsides ---------------------------------------- There were lots of great things said about the Histogram library: - design: excellent, clean, simple and extensible in principle - useful and well-designed features - geared towards readability and performance - very good documentation ---------------------------------------- Final Thoughts ---------------------------------------- Reviewers are worth their weight in gold nowadays. Once again, I'd like to thank all participants for great amount of quality feedback that already led to important improvements in the Histogram library in very timely manner - thank you Hans! The Histogram library is a valuable addition to Boost. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot Review Manager for the proposed Boost.Histogram

2 1

Re: [boost] Mail List Migration - Update
by Tom Kent 21 Oct '18

21 Oct '18

> > The Boost mail lists are now migrated to a new set of servers. > This change affected all mail lists and web resources (signing up, > changing passwords, moderator access, archives...) that were associated > with the domain lists.boost.org . > If you are having difficulties, please drop me an email. (Oh the irony) > Happy coding! > michael > -- > Michael Caisse > Ciere Consulting > ciere.com Michael- I've tried to send e-mail to a couple lists with boost over the past few days. On Tuesday, Oct 16, I sent an e-mail at 19:21 CDT to the boost(a)lists.boost.org list, "Non-ASCII Path Names in Repo" [1]. It seemed to take the better part of a day to be received by the list. I remember it taking a long time (>24hrs), but I can't prove that. However, if you click the previous message/next message links on [1], you'll see that both of those messages (including the one previous!) are timestamped several hours after mine. Now, as of Friday, Oct 19, at 06:59 CDT I had sent another e-mail, this time to boost-testing(a)lists.boost.org. As of writing this e-mail (07:35 CDT, Sunday Oct 21), it still hasn't shown up on the testing list [2], and I haven't received an e-mail saying that it was received by the list. Any thoughts as to what might be happening here? In the past (including earlier this month for boost-testing), I was able to post without issue from this address (lists(a)teeks99.com) to both of these lists. Thanks, Tom [1] https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2018/10/243784.php [2] https://lists.boost.org/boost-testing/2018/10/index.php

1 0

Allow LICENSE file per a library repository (PR #374)
by Mateusz Loskot 21 Oct '18

21 Oct '18

Hi, I'd like to bring this proposal to the community's attention: https://github.com/boostorg/website/pull/374 BTW, from time to time, while I looking at various requirements I try to refresh those outdated and catch up with the reality. I take baby steps. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

1 0

Re: [boost] Fwd: Installing CMake configuration files
by Peter Dimov 20 Oct '18

20 Oct '18

Steven Watanabe wrote: > Just a couple comments: ... > * I'm not fond of the ROOT parameter for boost-install.boost-install. > * Dependencies can be referenced with /boost/$(deps)//[stage|install] > * You can find the full path to the boost-install.jam with > [ path.root [ modules.binding $(__name__) ] [ path.pwd ] ] > This avoids hard-coding the location of boost_install relative > to the superproject. Actually, [ modules.binding $(__name__) ] seems to return an absolute path, so path.root/path.pwd may not be needed here? boostcpp.jam does BOOST_ROOT = [ modules.binding $(__name__) ] ; BOOST_ROOT = $(BOOST_ROOT:D) ; which kind of implies that it relies on getting the absolute path. > * That just leaves the stage directory, which is tied to the > project root, and should perhaps be calculated in Jamroot > instead of in boost_install. The stage directory needs to be retrieved from boostcpp, but boostcpp just sets it to "stage", which only works from top-level. It should probably use $(BOOST_ROOT)/stage, and then other modules can peek for it. There are other things that are needlessly replicated - install-header-subdir, install-default-prefix. All of these need to be peekable from a canonical location. > * This seems to handle --layout=versioned, but I'm not clear on > how well it handles --layout=system where we expect to use a > single compiled library for all configurations. It worked when I tried it. Note that you can have two libraries with --layout=system, not just one; libfoo.a and foo.so. > * Are the error messages that you get from CMake when there > isn't a configuration that matches the request intelligible? Not very. There's Boost_DEBUG, which tells you why something was skipped, but ideally, it needs to detect the case when no variant matched, and _then_ tell you why things were skipped without your having to set Boost_DEBUG beforehand. I haven't gotten that far yet; usability can be improved once we have it working. > It looks like the target will exist but will silently do nothing? Yes, you get a link error. > What if something goes wrong and there are multiple matches? I haven't encountered this so far :-) although it's possible in principle because at the moment I ignore some "non salient" properties. > * If generate-cmake-config takes the library as a source, > then it's possible to derive both the library dependencies > and the exact library name from the library target. The > dependencies can be found at the virtual target level in > generate-cmake-config, and the exact file name will appear > as the source in generate-cmake-config-. Doing it this way > also has the side effect that the CMake configuration won't > be installed if the library fails to build, which may be a > good thing. These may take me a while to figure out. :-)

3 15

[asio] Issues piling up
by Vinnie Falco 20 Oct '18

20 Oct '18

There are issues which are years old which have been lingering in the Boost.Asio repository, and there are also old issues in the stand-alone Asio repository. It seems like these are being ignored, is there any strategy for addressing this? Examples: This one is going on a year: <https://github.com/boostorg/asio/issues/77> Two years: <https://github.com/chriskohlhoff/asio/issues/124> Thanks

10 16

Re: [boost] Fwd: Installing CMake configuration files
by Peter Dimov 20 Oct '18

20 Oct '18

> Yeah, I haven't been able to figure this part out. How do I pass the > $(sources) from generate-cmake-variant to generate-cmake-variant-'s > sources? The sources - in this case $(lib-target) go here, after `non-scanning-action`: local a = [ new non-scanning-action $(lib-target) : boost-install.generate-cmake-variant- : $(property-set) ] ; :-)

1 0

Installing CMake configuration files
by Peter Dimov 19 Oct '18

19 Oct '18

I've taken another stab at installing CMake configuration files along with the libraries in `b2 install`. CMake configuration files are .cmake files, typically installed into $prefix/lib or $prefix/lib/cmake, that allow f.ex. `find_package(boost_system)` in a CMakeLists.txt file to find the installed Boost.System library and declare a CMake target Boost::system that refers to it. CMake targets can then link to Boost::system and all is well. The work in its current state is available on the feature/cmake-config branch of the superproject: git clone --recursive -b feature/cmake-config https://github.com/boostorg/boost cd boost bootstrap b2 --prefix=... install After that .../lib should contain the libraries and .../lib/cmake - the config files. Then from CMake cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=... .. as usual. See for example the test scripts at https://github.com/boostorg/boost_install/blob/master/.travis.yml#L60 and https://github.com/boostorg/boost_install/blob/master/appveyor.yml#L40 Since `b2 install` installs more than one library variant, the CMake configurations need to pick the correct one and to do so look at (a subset of) the FindBoost-compatible variables as described at: https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/master/Modules/FindBoost.cmake#L122 Boost_USE_DEBUG_LIBS, Boost_USE_RELEASE_LIBS, Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS, Boost_USE_STATIC_RUNTIME, Boost_COMPILER, Boost_DEBUG are honored and have the same meaning as in FindBoost. Boost_USE_MULTITHREADED and Boost_USE_DEBUG_RUNTIME are presently ignored, but probably shouldn't be. :-) The default of Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS being OFF is a bit inconvenient on Windows, where without `--build-type=complete` our installation only gives you static libraries, and there are suggestions to respect it being ON or OFF, but when not set, to look at BUILD_SHARED_LIBS instead. Under the hood this represents a refactoring of the current centralized installation approach in which the superproject staged and installed the libraries on `b2 stage` and `b2 install`. Now the top level stage and install targets just delegate to each library's stage and install targets, which are responsible for staging/installing that particular library, its CMake config, and its dependencies. These library-level stage and install targets are created by the helper b2 rule boost-install, which already existed (in Jamroot), but is now much enhanced and lives in its own module tools/boost_install. In addition, a metalibrary libs/headers is introduced, which corresponds to the headers as present in a release (in subdirectory boost/) or as installed by `b2 install`. Its install target, in fact, installs the headers, and its stage target, currently empty, should probably assume the function of linking the headers (which at the moment also lives in Jamroot.) At some future point, when we decide to switch to releasing the headers in their original libs/$lib/include locations, the install target of a library will just copy that library's headers; but we aren't there yet. The header-only libraries are used from CMake by finding the package boost_headers and linking to the target Boost::headers. I've deliberately not done anything about Boost::boost and find_package(Boost), to allow FindBoost.cmake to delegate to the config files if present (when Boost 1.69/1.70 or higher is installed), while preserving backward compatibility (when 1.68 or lower is installed.)

6 13

test message - please ignore
by Robert Ramey 19 Oct '18

19 Oct '18

just to see if my newsgroup interface is working. Robert Ramey

1 0

[python] Checking Python version
by Edward Diener 18 Oct '18

18 Oct '18

How do I check the Python major version in code when using Boost.Python ? I know there is a way to do it through a preprocessor define by including the CPathon patchlevel.h file but I would rather not include low-level Python files if Boost.Python has some way of doing it.

2 1