July 2018 - Boost - lists.boost.org

Searching for a intrusive::avltree_algorithms/bstree_algorithms dev
by Thimothée Virgoulay 16 Jul '18

16 Jul '18

Hello I'm working with the boost library (intrusive: : avltree_algorithms/bstree_algorithms ) and I found some bugs (not sure, maybe it's me who haven't understood the algorithm logic ). I have made hotfixes , add functions and it's working. But I don't know if this change were fine or needed. So I 'm searching for someone who can exchange with me about this library. Thimothée Virgoulay, second's year master degree in Bioinformatics at Montpellier University, France.

4 3

[rational] 1.68.0 merge permission
by James E. King III 16 Jul '18

16 Jul '18

The addition of pow() for rational was identified as a problem in beta testing. It has been reverted for now, and an issue added to the github repository to revisit it after 1.68.0. There are two commits I would like to merge to master: 1. The revert of pow which caused problems 2. A CI-only change to .travis.yml that fixes codecov.io and coverity scan build jobs in light of recent security upgrades in travis CI. No production code changes, zero affect on the release build workflow. This will allow the build status to remain green for the repository as it is merged to master. Thanks, Jim

2 1

[CMT] 1.68.0 merge permission
by James E. King III 16 Jul '18

16 Jul '18

The CI builds in CMT repositories are failing since Travis CI updated their backend last week. The fix is simple and isolated in the .travis.yml file in each repository which is not part of the boost release build cycle. All repositories develop branch have been updated with the fix. I'd like to merge the fix in the CMT repositories into master to eliminate the remaining failed build indicators. Given the change is only in .travis.yml I hope that will be acceptable. Without the fix any cron job on master in these repositories will fail in codecov.io and covscan. Thanks, Jim

2 1

Invalid arguments
by randy 16 Jul '18

16 Jul '18

I’ve the following function but i get invalid arguments error , can please someone tell me where’s this invalid param or argument : int Asio_Send_Pck(int iSendt,int Lsocket,char * Lbuff,int Len) { session* iTempSession = reinterpret_cast<session*>(Lsocket); boost::asio::async_write(iTempSession->socket() , boost::asio::buffer(Lbuff, Len), boost::bind(&session::handle_write, iTempSession, boost::asio::placeholders::error, iTempSession->data, iSendt )); return 0; };

2 1

Boost.Signals deprecation and removal
by James E. King, III 15 Jul '18

15 Jul '18

This first implementation of signals has been deprecated since the 1.54 release. (When) are we going to remove it? It is under management of the CMT, and it has been deprecated for over 10 major releases. I would like to suggest we remove it in the Boost 1.68.0 release. - Jim

9 9

Reporting accurate code coverage
by James E. King III 13 Jul '18

13 Jul '18

General Code Coverage Tip (for everyone): Measure your coverage using branches, not lines. Branch coverage tells you how well error cases are tested and therefore a far better measure of quality than line-based. I have seen over 90% line coverage but the branch coverage is more like 60% to 70% on average over the boost CMT-managed repositories. Here's the shell script I use on travis to generate the data and feed it to codecov.io: https://github.com/jeking3/boost-ci/blob/master/ci/travis/codecov.sh The trick is to feed --rc lcov_branch_coverage=1 to the correct commands to generate and preserve the branch information. Thanks, - Jim

3 3

[boost-ci] code coverage build fix
by James E. King III 13 Jul '18

13 Jul '18

For folks using boost-ci integration, here is a fix to your .travis.yml file to enable code coverage builds to work again. I received confirmation from Travis CI that a back-end update on their end corrected some security issues which necessitates this change. https://github.com/boostorg/rational/pull/22/files In the script section of the coverage job, replace the commands: cd lcov && sudo make install with: export PATH=/tmp/lcov/bin:$PATH Thanks, Jim

1 0

[boost-ci] codecov.io integration
by James E. King III 13 Jul '18

13 Jul '18

Folks using boost-ci integration may see the code coverage builds failing. Part of the .travis.yml script includes logic to update lcov to a newer version for branch coverage to work. These build jobs are breaking due to enforcement of the sudo restriction. I am working on a way to fix this and will send out an update when I have a solution. - Jim

1 0

[Range] 1.68 master/beta MSVC compilation error with /fpermissive-
by Vinnie Falco 13 Jul '18

13 Jul '18

When compiling using /fpermissive- (enable strict conformance) I get the following compilation error: boost\boost\range\concepts.hpp(257): error C3646: 'n': unknown override specifier boost\boost\range\concepts.hpp(264): note: see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::range_detail::RandomAccessIteratorConcept<Iterator>' being compiled boost\libs\beast\include\boost\beast\core\string.hpp(87): note: see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::basic_string_view<char,std::char_traits<char>>' being compiled boost\boost\range\concepts.hpp(257): error C4430: missing type specifier - int assumed. Note: C++ does not support default-int boost\boost\range\concepts.hpp(257): error C3646: 'n': unknown override specifier boost\boost\range\concepts.hpp(264): note: see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::range_detail::RandomAccessIteratorConcept<Iterator>' being compiled I'm using the tip of master, digest 000bd8507f8a17ada2c1fef19158e16cdeabd631 Thanks

6 14

[Boost.Serialization] Help with PR fixing a memory leak in the current version
by Alexander Grund 12 Jul '18

12 Jul '18

Hi, TLDR: I would like https://github.com/boostorg/serialization/pull/105 to be merged for the next Boost release to fix a memory leak and need someone to review this or help getting it merge-ready. Details: Some time ago I made an analysis of a crash introduced in Boost 1.65.0 in the serialization part. The details are quite complicated as the cause is static initialization/destruction order in shared libraries which may even depend on compilers (could not confirm) or standard libraries (dito, observed in all tested versions). It boils down to a violation of the expected destruction order in the case of shared libraries. I observed how 2 global instances of the same type but from different shared libs are destroyed together although the 2nd should not yet be which causes a use-after-free from another global instance. The Singletons involved did have methods to detect, whether they are active or destroyed but they were kinda optimized away in Boost 1.65 leading to a crash which makes the whole library unusable. Not understanding the root cause of the crash lead to changing the singleton to use dynamic allocation, but not freeing it which leads to the memory leak that is currently in Boost. The current state of the develop-branch changed this back to the crash situation we had before making it unsuitable for the next release. Another pair of eyes would be great to check the PR and get this finally fixed. Thanks, Alex

6 33