- Boost - lists.boost.org

GSoC2011 proposal submitted : Community Detection Module
by Xu Sun 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

Hi, I have submitted the proposal about implementing a community detection module for BGL. Everyone is welcomed to give me a comment as the feedback. Details at: http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2011/sunbow/1 Thanks, Xu Sun

1 0

Re: [boost] [lexical cast] Performance improvements
by Antony Polukhin 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

>From Gruenke, Matt >>From Vicente BOTET, on Mon 4/4/2011 5:59 PM: >> I think that it is better to improve my library that is there to manage with any conversion, and let lexical cast do what it did originally. >> Let me know what do you think. > >It didn't sound like he change the behavior of lexical_cast<>(), at all. I am very much in favor of these optimizations going in, since I have a large >amount of code which uses lexical_cast<>(). Yes, I did not changed the behavior of the library, but only added optimizations for some conversions, which sometimes occur when lexical_cast is used in generic programming. There are some more optimizations for lexical_cast in bug database (tickets #5417 and #5350) >From Vicente BOTET > Let me know what do you think. > > Best, > Vicente I`ve looked at Boost.Conversion library at sandbox/conversion/. The idea is interesting, but: 1) char ch = '0'; std::cout << boost::lexical_cast<int>(ch) << " " << boost::numeric_cast<int>(ch); This code will output "0 48" We can not make your library output both values... There are some tags, but in both cases it will be boost::dummy::type_tag<char> (or may be I didn`t get the idea) 2) For each conversation user will need to write convert_to<required_type> function overload. It will be much better, if user was required to write only one conversion function (to some intermediate type), and the library will be able to convert to any other type from intermediate type. I use lexical_cast<>() a lot, so I`d better improve it first.

1 0

[release][1.47] Release branch open + schedule
by Daniel James 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

Hello everyone, It's been over a week since the release, so it's time to open the release branch. Since we're running late, and we haven't discussed the changes to the schedule, and I think it helps people to pace their development, we should probably decide on a schedule for this release pretty quickly, and then discuss the schedule for future releases later. We discussed having longer betas, 4 weeks was suggested. If we do that this time, it'll leave a very small window for merging to release, so I think 3 weeks might be better. Something like: 4th April: Release branch closed for beta (bug fixes only). 11th April: Beta target date. 2nd May: Release target date. Note: That's just a proposal, not the actual schedule. It isn't up to me. That's still a tight schedule, maybe a shorter beta or a delayed release would be better. Any thoughts? Daniel

4 7

Re: [boost] [Filesystem] Linking problem with 1_46_1
by Max Moorkamp 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

> Max Moorkamp wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have recently upgraded to boost 1_46_1 and since then I am >> > experience linking problems with the filesystem library. >> > >> > I have performed a standard install using ./bootstrap.sh; bjam; bjam >> > install under Ubuntu 10.04 with the default gcc (4.4.3). >> > I can boil the problem down to this test program: >> > >> > #include<boost/filesystem.hpp> >> > #define BOOST_FILESYSTEM_VERSION 3 >> > #define BOOST_FILESYSTEM_NO_DEPRECATED >> > >> > int main() >> > { >> > boost::filesystem::copy_file("a", "b"); >> > } >> > >> > compiling this with >> > >> > g++ test.cpp -lboost_system -lboost_filesystem >> > > It might be as simple as the order you link to the libraries. The boost > filesystem library depends on the boost system library, so you should > probably put "-lboost_system" after "-lboost_filesystem" on the command > line to link your program. That was my first thought, but the linking error does not come from boost_system, plus all of g++ test.cpp -lboost_filesystem -lboost_system g++ test.cpp -lboost_system -lboost_filesystem g++ test.cpp -lboost_filesystem give the same /tmp/cc9OO6P2.o: In function `boost::filesystem3::copy_file(boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::path const&)': test.cpp:(.text._ZN5boost11filesystem39copy_fileERKNS0_4pathES3_[boost::filesystem3::copy_file(boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::path const&)]+0x2a): undefined reference to `boost::filesystem3::detail::copy_file(boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::copy_option::enum_t, boost::system::error_code*)' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Regards Max -- Max Moorkamp IFM-GEOMAR Wischhofstr. 1-3 24148 Kiel Tel.: Germany - 431 - 600 2570 FAX.: Germany - 431 - 600 2915

1 0

[lexical cast] Performance improvements
by Antony Polukhin 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

Working with Boost Lexical Cast library found that some casts are working really slow. For example, cast from short to int is done via cast from short to char[], and cast from char[] to int. Cast from char* to string is done via string() constructor call and string`s append function call (instead of string constructor call with char array as a parameter). So I wrote patch to Boost Lexical Cast library, that returns Target directly constructed from Source in cases, when: 1) Source and Target are arithmetics (and not char or wchar_t), and all values of Source are in range of Target 2) Source and Target are both char or both wchar_t 3) Source is array of CharT and Target is std::basic_string<CharT, ...> 4) Source and Target are std::basic_string with same template parameters It gives performance boost more than 10 times in case 1) , about 7 times in case 2), and about 1.5 times in cases 3) and 4). Existing tests for Boost Lexical Cast library cover considered cases. Patch was successfully tested on Intel 11.1.072, g++-4.4.5, VC++9 compilers. P.S.: I`m a newbie here, so where shall I send this patch? Shall I test it on other compilers?

5 5

[Filesystem] Linking problem with 1_46_1
by Max Moorkamp 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

Hi, I have recently upgraded to boost 1_46_1 and since then I am experience linking problems with the filesystem library. I have performed a standard install using ./bootstrap.sh; bjam; bjam install under Ubuntu 10.04 with the default gcc (4.4.3). I can boil the problem down to this test program: #include <boost/filesystem.hpp> #define BOOST_FILESYSTEM_VERSION 3 #define BOOST_FILESYSTEM_NO_DEPRECATED int main() { boost::filesystem::copy_file("a", "b"); } compiling this with g++ test.cpp -lboost_system -lboost_filesystem results in this error message /tmp/ccBuSw7s.o: In function `boost::filesystem3::copy_file(boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::path const&)': test.cpp:(.text._ZN5boost11filesystem39copy_fileERKNS0_4pathES3_[boost::filesystem3::copy_file(boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::path const&)]+0x2a): undefined reference to `boost::filesystem3::detail::copy_file(boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::path const&, boost::filesystem3::copy_option::enum_t, boost::system::error_code*)' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status I had a look at this thread http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Filesystem-problems-with-g-std-c-0x-td26… but adding or removing -std=c++0x does not change anything. I also tried to see whether any special compiler options were used during the build of boost, so here is the line for operations.hpp "g++" -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -pthread -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_SYSTEM_STATIC_LINK=1 -DNDEBUG -I"." -c -o "bin.v2/libs/filesystem/build/gcc-4.4.3/release/link-static/threading-multi/v3/src/operations.o" "libs/filesystem/v3/src/operations.cpp" There is nothing there that strikes me as special, any ideas anyone. Regards Max -- Max Moorkamp IFM-GEOMAR Wischhofstr. 1-3 24148 Kiel Tel.: Germany - 431 - 600 2570 FAX.: Germany - 431 - 600 2915

3 2

[trac] Phoenix Component
by Thomas Heller 04 Apr '11

04 Apr '11

Hi, Can someone please add a Phoenix component to trac and add me and JdG as maintainer? Thanks, Thomas

3 3

[GSoC] coerce (previously construe_cast)
by Jeroen Habraken 04 Apr '11

04 Apr '11

Hi, Some time ago I've announced construe_cast as a library which builds upon boost.spirit to create a cast-like operator aiming to provide an alternative to lexical_cast providing greater speed and flexibility. It has since been renamed to boost.coerce (it's the last rename, I promise) and it has found its way to the boost sandbox where development will continue. For the original email I'd like to point you to http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/construe-cast-call-for-interest-and-feed…. Due to an internship I haven't been able to get much done on this project lately. I would still very much like to see this through and because of this I would like to propose this as a GSoC project. There is quite a bit to be done to get this to the level expected from a potential boost library, however I believe I can get it in a state where it can be reviewed within the timespan set for the GSoC. The request for feedback stands, and please be expecting my proposal! Regards, Jeroen Habraken

4 4

[serialization]Can I pass the grandparent class to BOOST_SERIALIZATION_BASE_OBJECT_NVP?
by Takatoshi Kondo 04 Apr '11

04 Apr '11

Hi, I'd like to check that my approach is correct or not. Condition: There are three classes A, B and C. The class A is the base class of B. The class B is the base class of C. Requirements: 1.The class A and B shouldn't depend on the serialization library. 2.The class C should be serialized via the base class A (Polymorphic). My approach: Applying non intrusive version serialize function to the class A and B. In the class C, using the macro BOOST_SERIALIZATION_BASE_OBJECT_NVP with the argument A (not B). I skip the class B in the class hierarchy on purpose. If I pass it B instead of A, the following exception would be occurred. "unregistered void cast struct C<-struct A" I believe that my approach is correct. (using A) But I suspect that it might work correctly by accident. #include <boost/serialization/serialization.hpp> #include <boost/archive/xml_oarchive.hpp> #include <boost/archive/xml_iarchive.hpp> #include <boost/serialization/nvp.hpp> #include <boost/serialization/export.hpp> #include <fstream> struct A { virtual ~A() {} }; // non intrusive serialize namespace boost { namespace serialization { template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive& /*ar*/, A&, unsigned int const /*version*/) {} }} struct B : public A {}; // non intrusive serialize namespace boost { namespace serialization { template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive& /*ar*/, B&, unsigned int const /*version*/) {} }} struct C : public B { friend class boost::serialization::access; template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive& ar, unsigned int const /*version*/) { ar & BOOST_SERIALIZATION_BASE_OBJECT_NVP(A); // My approach // ar & BOOST_SERIALIZATION_BASE_OBJECT_NVP(B); } }; BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT(C) int main() { { std::ofstream ofs("test.xml"); C c ; A* a(&c); boost::archive::xml_oarchive oa(ofs); oa << boost::serialization::make_nvp("a", a); } { std::ifstream ifs("test.xml"); boost::archive::xml_iarchive ia(ifs); A* a; ia >> boost::serialization::make_nvp("a", a); assert(dynamic_cast<C*>(a)); delete a; } } Regards, Takatoshi Kondo

3 2

[local] files organization
by Vicente Botet 04 Apr '11

04 Apr '11

Hi, While installing Boost.Local I observed that there are 3 directories under Boost to update; detail, local and utility. To make easier the update, it will be worth to move all the detail and utility parts under the local directory. local/ detail/ preprocessor/ keyword/ variadic_macro_data utility/ BTW, if you just copy files from other libraries waiting from them to be released, shouldn't you preserve the copyright (VMD)? Shouldn't the utility identity go to the detail/preprocessor directory? Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/local-files-organization-tp3424684p34246… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

1 0