- Boost - lists.boost.org

Requesting opinions on CECS (C/C++ Error Control) library for possible boost implementation.
by Terablade 08 Sep '19

08 Sep '19

Hi all. Recently I focused on completing and releasing a public a C/C++ library for C/C++ Error Control System. I've exposed the library to public via two articles in Linked In, and especially in the "C++ Developers Groups" were I got some positive feedback (a few comments and likes). A "Senior Architect at Apple" left the following comment: "Man that’s error traceability for a lot of readability". This made me wonder if this library deserves to be exposed more to C/C++ developers, and led me to think of boost library. Personally I'm testing the library by integrating it in different projects, and I'm quite happy from the outcome. With very few code (increased readability) and a specific design approach for capturing and handling possible errors, it does provide a lot of customized error traceability - a feature which for me is quite important on complex projects and especially when multiple libraries mix up and need integrated error tracking through all of them. Reading the boost guidelines I joined this mailing list to request review and opinions.As my free time is a a bit limited to convert and test the library to be supported by boost, I'd like some comments and review first.Do you believe that CECS could be a useful util for Boost? Should I go for it? The two articles in that group (requires membership) is at:https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6568218380594098176… articles are also in my profile:https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cecs-cc-error-control-system-vasilei… I have also released the library on github:https://github.com/terablade2001/CECS I'd like to note that the library has been favored till now by 7 accounts in github (8 including me) which, for me, is also a positive feedback. Thanks for your time,V. Pothos

1 0

[GSOC19] Congrats to all students and mentors
by Damian Vicino 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

Hi, GSOC finished for 2019. We had 11 students this year and all of them survived the summer and contributed a lot of good stuff. Hopefully, most of it will be merged in the next few weeks. Thanks to all students and mentors, and to Boost community for supporting the program. Special thanks to David Bellot that worked as org admin and dealed with the logistics in addition to mentor. Cheers, Damian

2 1

[bimap] Maintaining library
by Edward Diener 04 Sep '19

04 Sep '19

Could someone please take a look at bimap in order to maintain the library. I have had a simple PR since last December, simply to remove executable permissions from some files, which has been ignored and no one appears to be maintaining the library.

1 0

boost::asio::deadline_timer and boost::asio::io_service
by JH 02 Sep '19

02 Sep '19

Hi, I use a single thread to run 3 classes using boost::asio::deadline_timer, the timers are managed by boost::asio::io_service. I deliberately use a single thread to avoid mutex, I believe those 3 timers are called exclusively by boost::asio::io_service in a single thread, there won't be race condition to share the objects among them, is it correct? Thank you. Kind regards, - jupiter

2 7

Re: [boost] A solution to return dynamic strings without heap allocation. Any interest?
by Bjorn Reese 01 Sep '19

01 Sep '19

On 8/29/19 3:24 PM, Roberto Hinz via Boost wrote: > auto result = csw.finish(); > if (result.truncated) { > // ... I suggest that you change the return type of finish() to contain the number of element written instead of the truncated boolean. This would make outbuf extensible to binary data as well where you cannot rely on a terminating zero to tell you how much data has been written. The return type could also have begin()/end() member functions, which makes it directly usable with STL algorithms. In that case it would also make sense to have data()/size().

2 3

Re: [boost] [Boost-users] License Issue with boost_intrusive
by Michael Caisse 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

Copying to dev ML. On 8/22/19 12:05, Gerald Wiltse via Boost-users wrote: > During an annual third-party audit of our source code, boost intrusive > was flagged as containing unlicensed code. Specifically, there are > several pieces of code in this file which are explicitly attributed to > external parties on external websites, which still exist and show no > license. > > https://github.com/boostorg/intrusive/blob/develop/include/boost/intrusive/… > > https://github.com/boostorg/intrusive/blob/develop/include/boost/intrusive/… > > > Original sources: > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11376288/fast-computing-of-log2-for-64-b… > http://www.flipcode.com/archives/Fast_log_Function.shtml > > I don't claim to be a license expert. I've read a lot over the years, > but this is the first time that I've actually been between an attorney > and a codebase having to figure out practical implications of a scenario > like this. > > I first want to make sure that Boost committee is aware of this situation. > > Second, I would like to know what the official conclusion would be from > the Boost Committee about the license implications in cases like these. > Maybe it has come up before and is well established. On the surface, the > implications seems ambiguous to me when: DEVELOPER_A takes unlicensed > code off the internet, prefixes it with a comment that says "Thanks to > DEVELOPER_B ", then prefixes the whole file with a file-level copyright > notice that says "COPYRIGHT DEVELOPER_A", and then says it's > distributed under BSL-1.0 license, and then the boost team > re-distributes the source code. > > Internally at my company, there was little discussion about it. There > is no room for ambiguity, so the directive from management was to delete > the file from our SCM system completely and ensure it never is included > in our products. VERY fortunately, deleting it doesn't seem to have > broken our builds. In future cases like this, that's really not what we > want to be doing with your OSS libraries for obvious reasons. So, I'd > like to know if there's any chance this situation changes in a future > version of Boost (I.E., the code be removed/re-written with clean-room > approach, etc). > > Regards, > Jerry > > Gerald R. Wiltse > jerrywiltse(a)gmail.com <mailto:jerrywiltse@gmail.com> > > > _______________________________________________ > Boost-users mailing list > Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users >

8 8

Set deadline_timer expired_at realtime clock 0 minute and repeat
by JH 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

Hi, How can I set deadline_timer expired at real clock absolute time at 0 minute, then repeat every minute? So it should expired at: 13:40:00, 13:41:00, 13:42:00 and so on? Thank you. Kind regards, - jupiter

2 7

Becoming the new maintainer of Boost.Functional/Factory (value_factory and factory)
by Glen Fernandes 26 Aug '19

26 Aug '19

Tobias (see forwarded e-mail below) has kindly agreed to allow me to become the maintainer of boost::factory and boost::value_factory (in Boost.Functional). I'll be revising the implementation of both for the next Boost (1.72) release, to: * Support r-value arguments * Use variadic templates to support arbitrary arguments * Support allocators that are final * Support allocators that use non-raw (fancy) pointers * Support BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS environments * Improve compilation times (drop Boost.Preprocessor usage) I'll add myself to the appropriate repository teams and update the library information accordingly. Glen ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: T.Schwinger <tschwinger(a)isonews2.com> Date: Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 5:38 AM Subject: Re: Maintaining Boost.Functional value_factory and factory To: Glen Fernandes <glen.fernandes(a)gmail.com> Hi Glen, On 25.08.19 19:46, Glen Fernandes wrote: > I'd like to assume maintenance of factory/value_factory in > Boost.Functional. Among other things, update them to support r-value > references (when the compiler supports it), as well as simplify the > implementation for when the compiler supports variadic templates. > Along with other work going forward. [...] > If you have no objections let me know. No objections - to the contrary: I'm grateful. Thank you for taking care of it! Best, Toby

1 0

Compliance with Boost copyright and license guidelines
by pbristow＠hetp.u-net.com 23 Aug '19

23 Aug '19

Prompted by some recent discussion of Boost license and copyright info by the Debian package team, I have recently been checking on the Boost.Multiprecision library and run the Boost inspect program https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_70_0/tools/inspect/ (originally written by Beman Dawes in 2003 and revised several times since). I’ve made some minor cosmetic changes to the program and the rather sparse documentation to make it easier to use by library authors and give a bit more info. It checks on compliance with https://www.boost.org/development/requirements.html. It’s use has been a little neglected recently but I conclude that we are not doing well enough in providing the proof of copyright and license that we promise. The results of my run of inspect on the boost/lib folder using develop branch are not pretty Problem counts: 1790 files missing Boost license info or having wrong reference text 1682 files missing copyright notice (but not I suspect quite as bad as they look – some items probably do not need copyright and license). Now that the 1.71 release is out bar a little shouting, I wonder if we should focus on improving compliance for the next release? I’d like to propose 1 A boost/tools/inspect/develop branch to refine the inspect program a little and improve the documentation (I have done something on this already for my education and use). 2 Discussion of the bad results (zip attached) to try to find why there are so many reports and to decide what to do. 3 Encourage all authors to run inspect on their library locally and try to remedy the items missing. 4 I suspect that many libraries will have items missing but the authors are also missing. So someone from the community maintenance team will need to take over and make some decisions on what to do. Often just providing a copyright claim from the obvious author and Boost license will suffice? 5 Try to improve the compliance with other guidelines. For example. there are many libraries that are failing to prevent with min and max macros for what of a couple of brackets. Usually (std::numeric_limits<>::max)(). All these will trip up Windows users in a puzzling way. Please can we just fix these? Views? Paul PS My halo is shining brightly 😉 Boost.Multiprecision has a problem count of zero 😊 (and I’m working on Boost.Math) Boost Inspection Report Inspect version no 3.1.15 Run Date: 08:44:19 UTC, Saturday 17 August 2019 Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt) Copyright Boost 2019 boost-no-inspect Inspection from path "libs" including subfolders. Totals: 52355 files scanned 4351 directories scanned (including root) 3472 problems reported Problem counts: 1790 files missing Boost license info or having wrong reference text 1682 files missing copyright notice Worst Offenders: outcome 940 metaparse 556 polygon 228 python 194 beast 192 Summary: algorithm (4) array (2) asio (12) … Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, Cumbria LA8 8AB UK

14 34

Re: [boost] crc.hpp:569 msvc warning C4800
by Kenneth Porter 22 Aug '19

22 Aug '19

This appears not to have made it into 1.71.0. I had to edit crc.hpp:569 to silence the warning. --On Saturday, April 13, 2019 1:35 PM -0700 Kenneth Porter via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > <https://github.com/boostorg/crc/pull/2> > > Visual Studio 2010-2019 issue this warning for crc.hpp line 569: > > warning C4800: "'int' : forcing value to bool 'true' or 'false' > (performance warning) > > bool const quotient = remainder & high_bit_mask; > > Replace with: > > bool const quotient = (remainder & high_bit_mask) != 0;

1 0