- Boost - lists.boost.org

Improving review process
by Vladimir Prus 15 Jan '11

15 Jan '11

Recently, there were various comments about current review process, and its possible improvements. However, I wanted to start with a small point. Looking at: http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html it seems that a few libraries have a review manager assigned, but there's no date. This means that: - It looks like our review schedule is full, because the item is there, and - It prevents anybody to volunteer as review manager for such library. I think there might be several reasons why a library does not have a review date: - The library is not actually ready. In that case, it should not be in that table at all. - The library author does not have the time for review. In that case, the library should also be removed from the list, because Boost is not responsible if the author is busy. - The review manager does not have the time for review. In that case, he should not be listed as assigned, and should not block others. Can we set a policy that: - A library can only be added in the review schedule if the author has time in near future to have a review, where near future is, say, 3 months. - A review manager is only assigned if a review date is set at the same time, where the date should be in near future -- say, 3 months again. I think such a policy might not improve our overall review speed too much, but surely will make the situation a bit clear, and allow to understand the real problems with the review system. Thanks, -- Vladimir Prus http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com Boost.Build: http://boost.org/boost-build2

20 52

Re: [boost] [Boost-commit] svn:boost r66696 - in trunk: boost/config boost/config/compiler boost/config/platform libs/config/doc libs/config/doc/html libs/config/doc/html/boost_config
by Steven Watanabe 15 Jan '11

15 Jan '11

AMDG On 11/22/2010 10:33 PM, admin(a)thefireflyproject.us wrote: > Author: wash > Date: 2010-11-23 01:33:35 EST (Tue, 23 Nov 2010) > New Revision: 66696 > URL: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/66696 > > Log: > Added *nix identification macros to Boost.Config; BOOST_NIX, BOOST_GENETIC_NIX, > BOOST_TRADEMARK_NIX and BOOST_FUNCTIONAL_NIX. Bryce, these macros are not used by anything in Boost and I saw no discussion on the mailing list about adding them. Please provide a justification for them, or I will revert this. Boost.Config should not have macros that we don't need. In Christ, Steven Watanabe

2 1

Re: [boost] [pgi-10.1] relocations compiler option
by vicente.botet 15 Jan '11

15 Jan '11

Hi, Sorry for the cross-post. It seems as nobody is posting on the Testing ML. Noel Belcourt is out until the 24th. Could someone check if the modification is needed? Vladimir? Best, Vicente ----- Original Message ----- From: vicente.botet To: Running Boost regression tests Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 7:49 PM Subject: [Boost-testing] [pgi-10.1] relocations compiler option Hi, there are some test in trunck that are failing Test output: Sandia-pgi-10.1 - chrono - xtime_static / pgi-10.1 It seems that the we need to add -fPIC, but -fpic . I don't know the compiler command syntax, but in case this could help, it will be worth to try. Could someone change this on trunk? Best, Vicente Test output: Rev 68033 / Wed, 12 Jan 2011 07:53:19 +0000 Report Time: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:19:47 +0000 Compile [2011-01-12 10:41:10 UTC]: succeed "/sierra/Sntools/extras/compilers/pgi/linux86-64/10.1/bin/pgCC" -INLINE:none -Wc,-a --brief_diagnostics --error_limit1 --compress_names --diag_suppress450 --no_using_std --zc_eh -Kieee -fpic -gopt -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_SYSTEM_DYN_LINK=1 -D__need_IOV_MAX -I".." -c -o "/scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/system/build/pgi-10.1/debug/error_code.o" "../libs/system/src/error_code.cpp" Link [2011-01-12 10:41:10 UTC]: fail "/sierra/Sntools/extras/compilers/pgi/linux86-64/10.1/bin/pgCC" -gopt -fpic --zc_eh -shared -o "/scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/system/build/pgi-10.1/debug/libboost_system.so" "/scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/system/build/pgi-10.1/debug/error_code.o" -Wl,-h -Wl,libboost_system.so -Bdynamic -lrt -lrt -Bstatic -Bdynamic /usr/bin/ld: /scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/system/build/pgi-10.1/debug/error_code.o: relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against `__catch_clause_number' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Bad value TinyUrl http://tinyurl.com/6z8ndcg _____________________ Vicente Juan Botet Escribá http://viboes.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Boost-Testing mailing list Boost-Testing(a)lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-testing

1 0

Re: [boost] [Boost-commit] svn:boost r67851 - trunk/boost/asio
by Steven Watanabe 15 Jan '11

15 Jan '11

AMDG On 1/8/2011 8:47 PM, admin(a)thefireflyproject.us wrote: > Author: wash > Date: 2011-01-08 23:47:56 EST (Sat, 08 Jan 2011) > New Revision: 67851 > URL: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/67851 > > Log: > Pathscale 4.0.0's stdlib (rw) has a<streambuf> that doesn't include<iostream>; > added an include to<iostream> here as this file needs it. > > Modified: trunk/boost/asio/basic_socket_iostream.hpp > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/boost/asio/basic_socket_iostream.hpp (original) > +++ trunk/boost/asio/basic_socket_iostream.hpp 2011-01-08 23:47:56 EST (Sat, 08 Jan 2011) > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ > > #if !defined(BOOST_NO_IOSTREAM) > > +#include<iostream> > #include<boost/preprocessor/arithmetic/inc.hpp> > #include<boost/preprocessor/repetition/enum_binary_params.hpp> > #include<boost/preprocessor/repetition/enum_params.hpp> This is more than is needed. std::iostream is defined in <istream>. <iostream> contains std::cout, etc. In Christ, Steven Watanabe

1 0

the <boost/detail/iomanip.hpp> header (please use it)
by Bryce Lelbach 15 Jan '11

15 Jan '11

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Linux, both clang and icc use GNU's C++ standard library by default. As of version 4.5 of GNU's stdlib, a new implementation of the <iomanip> header has been added, which makes use of C++0x features which only GCC supports (the latest versions of clang, e.g. a very recent nightly build, might work; intel certainly won't). The refactored <iomanip> header in GNU's stdlib does not detect C++0x support and fallback on the old C++98 friendly code, which unfortunately leaves clang-linux and intel-linux users in a bit of a bind. In particular, this plagues clang users on Linux as clang will use the latest available version of the GNU stdlib by default, meaning most users cannot have both gcc-4.5 and clang installed without problems. I have implemented the <iomanip> header in <boost/detail/iomanip.hpp>, under the boost::detail namespace (to avoid conflicts with system <iomanip> headers that users/other code might include). The implementation conforms to the C++03 standard (at least, I'm fairly confident it is standard compliant - reviews and feedback would be welcome). I just committed (r68140) a patch which replaces the use of <iomanip> with <boost/detail/iomanip.hpp>. I've tested on a few different compilers, and I'm pretty sure there are no regressions. If it does cause any problems, please let me know. This touches a few libraries, all in trivial ways. My apologizes to any maintainers I may have offended; please feel free to revert the relevant part of the commit (r68140) if you'd rather not have it in your library. P.S. For maximum portability, please use <boost/detail/iomanip.hpp> in Boost code in the future! - -- Bryce Lelbach aka wash boost-spirit.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk0vurkACgkQ9cB/V3/s9Exh0gCdF5vcDD0DfyONhrob4YFVBZzO 2KwAoIqFS06nk5TV98K0jea1rTj6FkHF =QGJS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 16

Section on suppressing gcc warnings complete in boost warning guidelines
by Patrick Horgan 14 Jan '11

14 Jan '11

I added a section to the boost warnings guidelines page about suppressing warnings with GCC. I think it's pretty good bringing together information I got on the gcc-help list, from reading the source and from browsing through the documentation for various releases of GCC. If anyone wants to check it for correctness and/or style I would be very appreciative. I would in particular like to thank Jonathan Wakely for his willingness to help and for the great help he gave me on the gcc-help list. https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines If you scroll to the bottom directly you'll see the end of the section on suppressing GCC warnings. I moved it after the sections on turning on warnings and on how to deal with some common warnings to reflect the viewpoint of the document that suppressing should be the last resort. I have some improvements to make to the section on strict aliasing to reflect the better work I did in my white paper on the subject, and I know the common warnings section needs information on more common warnings. The way I picked the ones that are in there originally was by turning on warnings for an earlier version of boost, saving the output of building the whole tree, then checking to see what the most common warnings were that indicated real bugs. That was without running tests or any program that used boost. Just building boost. It's been a long time and much good work has been done in the tree to get rid of those, so I should take a look at that again by turning on the -Wsystem-headers -Wall -Wextra and maybe -Wpedantic and seeing what warnings pop up in boost code that indicate real problems again. Wouldn't it be great if there were none? The most painful one is -Wsystem-headers which tells GCC to report warnings even in files considered system files, but since many of the boost files include the #pragma GCC system_file it will be necessary to see the warnings. Unfortunately, that means that I'll see warnings from real system files as well. In boost there are 21 headers that include the pragma, 15 of them in boost/exception. It's possible that they all really have spurious warnings you can't code around. Those certainly exist. I hope they're documented as to why they use the pragma to save me time looking at them. Perhaps I'll find real bugs in them. Probably not though. Thank you, Patrick

1 0

[context/fiber] new version
by Oliver Kowalke 14 Jan '11

14 Jan '11

issues related to boost.move (msvc) and DLLs are fixed.

1 0

[ratio][mpl] static metafunctions
by vicente.botet 14 Jan '11

14 Jan '11

Hi, during the Boost.Ratio review as requested to push some of the static integer metafunctions as static_abs, static_sign, static_gcd, static_lcm to a public library. At the begining I has the impression that these functions should be added to Boost.Integer or Boost.Math, but after reflexion I think that these static metafunctions could be better integrated into Boost.MPL with the existing integral functions. I have prepared a patch for 3 of them. Do you think that these can be added to Boost.MPL if I provide the needed documentation and tests? Best regards, _____________________ Vicente Juan Botet Escribá http://viboes.blogspot.com/

4 7

[announce] mirror-lib 0.5.2 released
by Matus Chochlik 14 Jan '11

14 Jan '11

Dear list, I would like to announce that a new version of the Mirror reflection library is available for download from SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mirror-lib/files/mirror-lib-0.5.2/ Since version 0.5.0, Mirror is being developed outside the boost namespace, but the directory linked above contains also a 'boostified' version of the sources with Jamfiles etc. Besides the docs package, the documentation is also hosted online here: http://kifri.fri.uniza.sk/~chochlik/mirror-lib/html/ To get the idea what the library can do you can look at the examples. http://kifri.fri.uniza.sk/~chochlik/mirror-lib/html/examples.html Some screenshots of input dialogs generated by the factory generator utility can be found here: http://kifri.fri.uniza.sk/~chochlik/mirror-lib/html/mirror__wx__gui__fact__… NOTE: Since Mirror uses C++1x AFAIK it will currently compile only with gcc (tested with gcc 4.5.1 and 4.5.2 64-bit on Linux and 4.5.1 on cywin) Questions, comments, feedback or potential contributions are always appreciated. Best regards, Matus

2 4

Files only in release branch
by Marshall Clow 14 Jan '11

14 Jan '11

As of revision 68145, there are a bunch of files that exist only in the release branch, and not in the trunk. Is this on purpose? boost/graph/kolmogorov_max_flow.hpp boost/pending/integer_range.hpp boost/smart_ptr/enable_shared_from_this2.hpp libs/functional/hash/test/container_fwd_test.cpp libs/functional/hash/test/container_no_fwd_test.cpp libs/graph/doc/kolmogorov_max_flow.html libs/serialization/vc7ide/polymorphic_derived2.vcproj libs/serialization/vc7ide/readme.txt libs/serialization/vc7ide/test_recusion.vcproj libs/test/example/cla/Jamfile libs/test/example/est_example1.cpp libs/test/example/est_example2.cpp libs/test/example/unit_test_example_011.cpp libs/test/example/unit_test_example_012.cpp libs/test/test/CMakeLists.txt tools/build/v2/doc/src/v1_vs_v2.xml tools/build/v2/engine/doc tools/build/v2/example/customization/jamfile.jam tools/inspect/run_inspect.sh -- Marshall Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:mclow.lists@gmail.com> A.D. 1517: Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the church door and is promptly moderated down to (-1, Flamebait). -- Yu Suzuki

3 2