- Boost - lists.boost.org

[release] Boost 1.71.0 Beta 1 - déjà vu
by Michael Caisse 23 Jul '19

23 Jul '19

Note: The previous email announcement still had the rc1 tag in the filenames. This version of beta1 is identical in content to beta1 rc1. Boost release 1.71.0 beta 1 is now available at: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.71.0.beta1/source/> The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 451adc4f199c73e995e541f38c4dbd51faf4ce0db15537136ffd5213a1be5e55 boost_1_71_0_b1.7z a93d7066fc1514995aec0e726532a219447dd39b0ffa7cb97ca5736f16b0488b boost_1_71_0_b1.tar.bz2 34743b80466463e0c1b7fc71b677f326bdc242fe0b87a9c1599b6f7ea6e5c0cb boost_1_71_0_b1.tar.gz 5cd448bddc8394469391306e0ccada0a8f88c5c6cf8ec775ddf8e56adef8bbc2 boost_1_71_0_b1.zip For details of what's in the release, see <http://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_71_0.html>. Note: Having some trouble getting the web page updated... check back with it soon. Please download the beta, give it a try, and report any problems you encounter. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

2 1

[BOOST] Boost fusion testcase fails with llvm and gcc when optimization enabled
by Jaydeep Chauhan 22 Jul '19

22 Jul '19

Hi Devs, consider below boost testcase, boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp when compiles with optimization enabled, $g++ -O2 -I./boost_1_70_0 boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp $./a.out ./boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp(391): test 'that.data == fusion::invoke(& members::data, fusion::join(sv_obj_c_ctx,seq))' failed in function 'void test_sequence_n(Sequence&, mpl_::int_<0>) [with Sequence = boost::fusion::vector<>]' ./boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp(401): test 'that.data == fusion::invoke(& members::data, fusion::join(sv_obj_c_d_ctx,seq))' failed in function 'void test_sequence_n(Sequence&, mpl_::int_<0>) [with Sequence = boost::fusion::vector<>]' ./boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp(391): test 'that.data == fusion::invoke(& members::data, fusion::join(sv_obj_c_ctx,seq))' failed in function 'void test_sequence_n(Sequence&, mpl_::int_<0>) [with Sequence = boost::fusion::list<>]' ./boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp(401): test 'that.data == fusion::invoke(& members::data, fusion::join(sv_obj_c_d_ctx,seq))' failed in function 'void test_sequence_n(Sequence&, mpl_::int_<0>) [with Sequence = boost::fusion::list<>]' 4 errors detected. And When compiled without any optimization $g++ -O0 -I./boost_1_70_0 boost_1_70_0/libs/fusion/test/functional/invoke.cpp $./a.out No errors detected. $g++ --version Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-9.1.0/configure -- --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-libquadmath --disable-libquadmath-support --disable-werror --disable-bootstrap --enable-gold Thread model: posix gcc version 9.1.0 (GCC) Here we demonstrated the test case with g++ but same can be seen with clang++. When analyzed further we have seen that this is [ boost_1_70_0/boost/fusion/functional/invocation/invoke.hpp:139 ] trying to return local address, which is undefined behavior. And that lead to above test-case failure. So either we have to modify test-case to pass as reference or disable it.But before going ahead like to know your thought/suggestions? Thanks, Jaydeep

1 0

Innocent but annoying warning in Boost QVM library
by Luigi Castelli 20 Jul '19

20 Jul '19

Hi Emil and all, when compiling Boost QVM, compilation succeeds but I get this warning: filename: quat_operations.hppwarning: Declaration shadows a typedef in function 'boost::qvm::axis_angle' A declaration in line 1438 shadows one in line 1414 Could this be solved for the next update?Thanks - Luigi

2 1

Boost log to limit log file maximum file size
by JH 20 Jul '19

20 Jul '19

H Andrey and all, Can the log file be configured to set up the file size cap, when the log file reaches to the maximum file size, it deletes it and starts a new log file not rotates it? Thank you. - jupiter

2 1

Lambda testcase fails when optimization enabled in gcc and llvm
by navya deepika garakapati 19 Jul '19

19 Jul '19

Hi Devs, consider below reduced testcase from boost lamda. $cat result_of_tests.cpp #include <boost/lambda/lambda.hpp> #include <stdio.h> template<class A, class F> typename boost::result_of<F(A)>::type apply1(F f, A b) { return f(b); } using namespace boost::lambda; int main(int, char *[]) { int one = 1; int d= (apply1<int>(_1 ,one) == 1); printf("\n%d\n",d); return 0; } when compiled with optimization O2 $g++ result_of_tests.cpp -I ./boost_1_70_0 -O2 $./a.out 0 And,when we compile same testcase with O0 $g++ result_of_tests.cpp -I ./boost_1_70_0 -O0 $./a.out 1 The above testcases is demonstrated with g++ compiler but behavior is same on clang as well. so we thought that this may be boost testcase issue. When we replace , int d= (apply1<int>(_1 ,one) == 1); with int d= (apply1<int&>(_1 ,one) == 1); testcase gives correct result with or without optimization. Wanted to confirm here,is it valid testcase or we have to modify testcase as per above? Thanks, Navya

3 5

Review request for LEAF, review manager needed
by Emil Dotchevski 19 Jul '19

19 Jul '19

I'm requesting a formal review for LEAF, a C++11 error-handling library: https://zajo.github.io/leaf. Features: * Header-only, no dependencies. * No dynamic memory allocations. * Compatible with std::error_code, errno and any other error code type. * Can be used with or without exception handling. LEAF comes complete with its own result<T> type, but it is compatible with any other type with value-or-error variant semantics (like outcome::result<T>) as long as .error() returns a std::error_code. https://travis-ci.org/zajo/leaf https://ci.appveyor.com/project/zajo/leaf

3 2

Re: [boost] [release] 1.71.0 closed for Beta
by Kenneth Porter 19 Jul '19

19 Jul '19

I'm seeing the following block of warnings repeated with several MSVC compiler versions. I'd suggest changing int to ptrdiff_t or size_t for the target type. f:\devel\Boost\boost_1_71_0\libs\locale\src\win32\api.hpp(149): warning C4244: 'argument': conversion from '__int64' to 'int', possible loss of data f:\devel\Boost\boost_1_71_0\libs\locale\src\win32\api.hpp(153): warning C4267: 'argument': conversion from 'size_t' to 'int', possible loss of data f:\devel\Boost\boost_1_71_0\libs\locale\src\win32\api.hpp(153): warning C4244: 'argument': conversion from '__int64' to 'int', possible loss of data f:\devel\Boost\boost_1_71_0\libs\locale\src\win32\api.hpp(170): warning C4244: 'argument': conversion from '__int64' to 'int', possible loss of data f:\devel\Boost\boost_1_71_0\libs\locale\src\win32\api.hpp(245): warning C4244: 'argument': conversion from '__int64' to 'int', possible loss of data f:\devel\Boost\boost_1_71_0\libs\locale\src\win32\api.hpp(249): warning C4244: 'argument': conversion from '__int64' to 'int', possible loss of data My build command: call .\bootstrap.bat --without-python .\b2 --without-python toolset=msvc-14.2,msvc-14.0,msvc-12.0,msvc-10.0 runtime-link=shared,static address-model=32,64

1 0

[release] 1.71.0 closed for Beta
by Michael Caisse 19 Jul '19

19 Jul '19

The master branch is now closed for all changes except by permission for the Beta release. Also, remember to add your libraries' changes to the release notes at: <https://github.com/boostorg/website/blob/master/feed/history/boost_1_71_0.q…> Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

5 8

Any sample code to configure boost log for syslog?
by JH 18 Jul '19

18 Jul '19

Hi, I am using boost log to write log file in the disk of the desktop, but for an embedded system application where the NAND flash is used, to prolong the flash service life time, I try not to write log files in flash, but use journalctl to view the log in RAM. Are there any simple example to configure boost log for syslog? Thank you. - jh

2 2

Something off my chest about Boost
by Maarten Verhage 18 Jul '19

18 Jul '19

Dear Boost people, Sorry but I need to get something off my chest regarding the Boost culture. To start of with something nice: I’m convinced Boost provides really useful facilities for C++ and some of them even make it into the standard C++ library. I do believe I can also contribute in a reasonable way. But the terse documentation keeps me from advancing. How it is currently stated on https://www.boost.org/users/faq.html “What about documentation? A very simple library might be accepted with only a well commented header file. For more substantial libraries, some form of documentation is certainly going to be expected. HTML is the preferred form.” To make Boost more accessible to people I believe Boost should ask more on this from current and new library authors. Speaking for myself. I think the first bits to get started with a library are on a sufficient level. You know the tutorial and the example code. But I get lost when I want to use the library for my own application domain. Then I do need library facilities not covered in the example code and sometimes the documentation mentions only the syntax. As I would imagine the library author working on his/her library judging whether to add a facility or not. Finally decided to add something: *the thought/motivation that goes along with that*, that would be so valuable for me to read that in the documentation!! Yes, I’m annoyed that I cannot read that in the documentation. Another issue is when example code introduces three or more facilities at once. Then it is very hard for me to see how these bits relate to each other to make it useful for myself. Ok, a few examples for what I would like to ask the Boost community to demand from the library authors: 1) In general, for the classes/functions where the user should directly deal with documentation like cppreference.com. So, with function prototypes showing the argument- and return types and a complete list of members along with what they do. 2) Specifically for Spirit X3, a part on Parser Directives: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/develop/libs/spirit/doc/x3/html/spirit_x3/qu… I would very much like that the reason why each directive is added along with a minimal example that shows how to use just that directive. Anyway, I hope people are also interested to discus documentation policies on this mailing list. I do believe it is important. Best regards, Maarten Verhage

10 17