- Boost - lists.boost.org

RE: RE: Re: Re:[boost] Re: Serialization Formal Review #2
by Rozental, Gennadiy 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

> > > The main problem I had was that certain member variable weren't > > > accessible. The STL collections don't have that issue so > there was no > > > problem. > > > Sorry if this is silly question, but why would you need an > access to > > the counter? IMO we should be able to save/load shared_ptr without > > need to save it. > > I checked the code (which was written some time ago) and the > answer to that question isn't obvious to me. I do remember > starting with the idea that it wouldn't be necessary to look > beyond shared_ptr but I had to just keep adding on to make > things work. The implementation of shared_ptr is A LOT more > involved that one would guess. > > My implementation of shared_ptr implementation may not be the > only or best one. It is pretty straight forward however in > that it follows the chain of composition - which includes > shared_count. > > Sorry I can't give a better answer. > > Robert Ramey There is another counter to direct counter using (I just think out loud - it may be that you ok): what if I do not save all of the shared_ptr to the same object? What will happened once they will get restored? Wouldn't it cause memory leak? I do realize that any other solution would be more complicated, but I think we should go for it. Gennadiy.

1 0

Re:RE: Re: Re:[boost] Re: Serialization Formal Review #2
by Robert Ramey 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

> > The main problem I had was that certain member variable weren't > > accessible. The STL collections don't have that issue so there was no > > problem. > Sorry if this is silly question, but why would you need an access to the > counter? IMO we should be able to save/load shared_ptr without need to > save it. I checked the code (which was written some time ago) and the answer to that question isn't obvious to me. I do remember starting with the idea that it wouldn't be necessary to look beyond shared_ptr but I had to just keep adding on to make things work. The implementation of shared_ptr is A LOT more involved that one would guess. My implementation of shared_ptr implementation may not be the only or best one. It is pretty straight forward however in that it follows the chain of composition - which includes shared_count. Sorry I can't give a better answer. Robert Ramey

1 0

shared_ptr and BOOST_DISABLE_THREADS
by Carl Daniel 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

Playing with a Spirit-based parser for a simple scripting language I noticed that #defining BOOST_DISABLE_THREADS resulted in a parser that was nearly 3 times faster. For reasons that aren't relevant to the discussion, this had to be an MT build, but the parser didn't need thread safety. That made me wonder though: If I #define BOOST_DISABLE_THREADS in some translation units but not in others, what's going to happen? I suppose one way of summarizing it is this: does BOOST_DISABLE_THREADS change the type of shared_ptr that's made? If not, that seems like a rather serious problem to me - especially given the enormous difference in performance that I measured (optimized build with VC8 alpha). What obvious thing am I overlooking? -cd

10 23

dynamic_bitset: work in progress...
by Gennaro Prota 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

Hi, for those interested in dynamic_bitset I wanted to reassure them that it will be stabilized soon. It's just, as I said, that I can work on it only for a couple of days per week, and for a couple of hours. This week, for instance, it happened that I saw the Borland regressions *after* my time expired (my timezone is in the way, too). I've integrated the new dyn_bitset_unit_test4 file in the Jamfile and fixed some errors of VACPP and gcc 3.4. Please, expect a correction time-frame of about 1/2 weeks. In the meantime, I hope to work on the documentation, which I can do from the office, during the launch break. I also wait for comments/suggestions, especially about the issues raised in http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg63220.php. Cheers, Genny. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

1 0

Serialization Formal Review #2 -- Review Period Closed
by Jeff Garland 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

The review period for the Serialization library is now over. Thanks to all the reviewers for their time in reviewing the library. Reviewers were unanimous in voting to accept the library. As a result, Serialization will be accepted into Boost. It will take me about a week to post a summary of the review comments and requested changes. And finally, thanks again to Robert for his unyielding effort to bring this library to Boost! Jeff

1 0

[iterator + named params] includes #error
by Vladimir Prus 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

When I try to compile the following code: #include <boost/named_params.hpp> #include <boost/iterator/transform_iterator.hpp> I get: ghost@zigzag:/tmp$ g++ -I ~/Work/boost -I ~/Work/boost-sandbox np.cpp In file included from /home/ghost/Work/boost/boost/iterator/detail/enable_if.hpp:15, from /home/ghost/Work/boost/boost/iterator/transform_iterator.hpp:14, from np.cpp:3: /home/ghost/Work/boost/boost/iterator/detail/config_def.hpp:22:3: #error you have nested config_def #inclusion. I suspect that the attached patch might need to be applied, but since I don't understand 'config_def.hpp' I though I'd ask first. - Volodya

1 0

[serialization, bind, vc7.1]
by Alexey Nikitin 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

Next example (only 2 lines) not compiled: ---- t120.cpp ----- #include <boost/bind.hpp> #include <boost/archive/text_iarchive.hpp> -------------------- D:\Alnik\cpp>cl /c /GX t120.cpp Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 13.10.3077 for 80x86 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation 1984-2002. All rights reserved. t120.cpp C:\Alnik\heap\boost\boost-dev\boost\mpl\less.hpp(39) : error C2760: syntax error : expected ',' not ';' C:\Alnik\heap\boost\boost-dev\boost\mpl\less.hpp(51) : see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::mpl::less<T1,T2>' being compiled C:\Alnik\heap\boost\boost-dev\boost\mpl\less.hpp(39) : error C2144: syntax error : 'const bool' should be preceded by '}' C:\Alnik\heap\boost\boost-dev\boost\mpl\less.hpp(39) : error C2062: type 'const bool' unexpected C:\Alnik\heap\boost\boost-dev\boost\mpl\less.hpp(39) : error C2238: unexpected token(s) preceding ';' C:\Alnik\heap\boost\boost-dev\boost\mpl\less.hpp(42) : error C2065: 'value' : undeclared identifier But if to rearrange lines then compiled. Is this the bug of compiler? Regards, Alexey.

2 1

logging library?
by John Torjo 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

Dear boosters, I know a while ago there was some interest in a logging library. And of course, there are so many ways you can do logging, that it was somehow agreed that a unique logging library can't address them. However ;), recently I discovered a very easy way to do logging. Gradually, I've come to this class (shown at the end). Using it is extremely easy, and it totally decouples what you write from where it's written. The idea is to have a function that takes a const std::string& parameter, and it will be called whenever a new message is logged. If you want thread-safety, it's just too simple... Just implement it within your function. Example: // log.h logstream errors_log(); logstream activity_log(); // log.cpp void do_log( const std::string & msg) { // ... thread-safe writing to cout scoped_lock lock(some_static_mutex); std::cout << msg; std::cout.flush(); } logstream errors_log() { return logstream(&do_log) << "[ERROR] "; } logstream activity_log() { return logstream(&do_log) << "[activity] "; } // in code #include "log.h" activity_log() << "application started (" << ver.major_ver << "." << ver.minor_ver << ")" << std::endl; errors_log() << "too many users" << users << std::endl; // etc. Also, I have an idea of how to enable/disable (parts of) logging at runtime. Same for very easily enabling/disabling logging of different modules. Any interest in such a library? Best, John #ifndef LOG_LOGSTREAM_HPP #define LOG_LOGSTREAM_HPP #pragma once // Copyright (c) John Torjo - 2004 #include <iosfwd> #include <sstream> namespace log { // allow finding the prototype for a log function template<class char_type, class traits = ::std::char_traits<char_type>, class aloc = ::std::allocator<char_type> > struct log_func { typedef void (*type)(const std::basic_string<char_type,traits,aloc> &); }; // allow writing to a log template<class char_type, class traits = ::std::char_traits<char_type>, class aloc = ::std::allocator<char_type> > struct basic_logstream { typedef typename log_func<char_type,traits,aloc>::type log_func_type; typedef ::std::basic_ostringstream<char_type,traits,aloc> ostring_stream_type; explicit basic_logstream( log_func_type func) : m_func(func) {} basic_logstream( basic_logstream & other) : m_func(other.m_func) { m_buffer << other.m_buffer.str(); other.m_func = 0; } ~basic_logstream() { if ( m_func) m_func( m_buffer.str() ); } template< class T> basic_logstream & operator<<( const T & val) { m_buffer << val; return *this; } typedef std::ostream & (*ostream_func)(std::ostream & ); basic_logstream & operator<<( ostream_func f) { f( m_buffer); return *this; } private: ostring_stream_type m_buffer; log_func_type m_func; }; typedef basic_logstream<char> logstream; typedef basic_logstream<wchar_t> wlogstream; } #endif

7 19

[iterator] concept checking for transform_iterator
by Vladimir Prus 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

I've just passed argument to make_transform_iterator in the wrong order, and could not understand the problem for quite some time. Maybe, it's possible to add some concept checking to catch such errors earlier. For example, the attached patch? Thoughs? - Volodya

1 0

program-options thread problem
by Neal D. Becker 27 Apr '04

27 Apr '04

I have both added current program-options to my boost build tree, and all the usual variants of libboost_program_options-gcc.a, also libboost_python-gcc-mt.a. Linking against libboost_program_options-gcc.a I get errors about pthread symbols. Adding -pthread fixes it. It looks to me that libboost_program_options-gcc.a is referencing pthread symbols. nm /usr/local/src/boost_1_31_0.gcc34/stage/lib/libboost_program_options-gcc.a | grep thread U pthread_mutex_destroy U pthread_mutex_init w pthread_mutex_lock w pthread_mutex_unlock w pthread_mutex_lock w pthread_mutex_unlock Yup,sure is.

3 7