- Boost - lists.boost.org

[uuid] looking for source
by Michael Caisse 09 Mar '09

09 Mar '09

I was looking for the current source for the uuid library. I have found the package used in the last mini-review. Is that the latest? Thank you. michael -- ---------------------------------- Michael Caisse Object Modeling Designs www.objectmodelingdesigns.com

2 2

Re: [boost] [math] Please give me some advice.
by Dongfei Yin 09 Mar '09

09 Mar '09

Hi, I just write some simple example in the main.cpp. now, I have an idea, what about to initialize the variable or assign before the expression. like this, variable<0> x(3.0); double x1 = (x + x * x)(); // x1 == 12 x = 4.0; double x2 = d(x + x * x, x)(); // x2 == 9 from the example, you can see that some of the expression is simplified from the output. that means the result of d(x + x, x) is 2 before running. I don't want to use variable<0>::type to define a variable, so some overload operator is needed. now, I use const_<N>() to define compile time variable, it seems not so convenient. what do you think about it. I will improve it according to your advice. BTW, I think it is easier than existing tools for automatic differentiation, right? Dongfei.

1 0

[filesystem] Normalize
by Konstantin Litvinenko 09 Mar '09

09 Mar '09

Hi All! I have noticed that fs::path("/foo/boo/.").normalize == fs::path("/foo/boo/.") and but I expect fs::path("/foo/boo/.").normalize == fs::path("/foo/boo") without trailing dot. I there is a reason why trailing dot is not removed? Is that paths is not equivalents on some systems?

1 1

wiki.boost.org Ancient
by Joel 09 Mar '09

09 Mar '09

Can wiki.boost.org be redirected to someplace useful? Right now it is an advertisement for crystal clear software. It is a bad advertisement since it is from 2005. Even worse, it has a link to a "boost wiki" that isn't being updated and has spam hidden away in it. It claims not to be official, but if the url is wiki.boost.org, it IS official! Thanks! Joel

4 6

[dynamic_bitset] intersects
by vicente.botet 08 Mar '09

08 Mar '09

Hi, I want to know if two dynamic_bitsets have an element in common. Is there an efficient way to get this? dynamic_bitset<> bs1, bs2; intersetcs(bs1, bs2)? Vicente

3 6

[Curry] generic and currying multimethod class
by Nowake 08 Mar '09

08 Mar '09

Hi, I implement curried function library and upload to Vault. http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=curry.… - This function object create the object that imitates curried function. you can call target function in incremental steps. # but you must regist each argument sets by hand. - This function is generic function. you can set different function object to each argument sets. - This function can also use multimethod. # but you must use holder (similar as boost::any) to hold argument. # this class act dynamic visitor for holder. - This function object is poor performance. it takes much time to execute function. Samples: ____________________________________________________________________ // target function object struct test_function { string operator()() { return "operator()()"; }; string operator()(int& a) { return "operator()(int:" + lexical_cast<string>(a) + ")"; }; string operator()(int& a, double& b) { return "operator()(int:" + lexical_cast<string>(a) + ", double:" + lexical_cast<string>(b) + ")"; }; string operator()(const int& a) { return "operator()(const int:" + lexical_cast<string>(a) + ")"; }; string operator()(const int& a, const double& b) { return "operator()(const int:" + lexical_cast<string>(a) + ", const double:" + lexical_cast<string>(b) + ")"; }; }; BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_pod) { // setup curry // create string return curry boost::curry<string> m00; // "entry" function to each argument sets. // nullary function m00.entry(test_function()); // unary function m00.entry<int>(test_function()); // binary function m00.entry<int, double>(test_function()); // you must "entry" each const type if you use const arguments. m00.entry<const int>(test_function()); m00.entry<const int, const double>(test_function()); // execute // incremental execution BOOST_AUTO(c00, m00()); BOOST_AUTO(c01, c00(100)); BOOST_AUTO(c02, c01(100.0)); BOOST_AUTO(r00, c02()); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(r00, "operator()(const int:100, const double:100)"); int i(100); double d(100.0); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(), "operator()()"); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(i)(), "operator()(int:100)"); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(i)(d)(), "operator()(int:100, double:100)"); // const value BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(100)(), "operator()(const int:100)"); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(100)(100.0)(), "operator()(const int:100, const double:100)"); // with holder object (holder is similar to boost::any) boost::holder h0(100); boost::holder h1(100.0); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(h0)(), "operator()(int:100)"); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(m00()(h0)(h1)(), "operator()(int:100, double:100)"); }; Regrads. Nowake

1 0

[math] Please give me some advice.
by Dongfei Yin 08 Mar '09

08 Mar '09

Hi, I have upload the file to Vault, file name is "[math]AD.zip". I have VC++ 2008 and the source can work under it. Please give me some advice to improve it. Dongfei.

1 0

Re: [boost] [Boost-users] C++03 unique_ptr emulation
by Howard Hinnant 08 Mar '09

08 Mar '09

On Mar 6, 2009, at 9:30 AM, Sergey Skorokhodov wrote: > Hi, > > Howard Hinnant wrote: >> I've put up a new version of an C++03 emulated unique_ptr here: > > <skip> > > I tried to use this implementation with MSVC 7.1 sp1 and 9.0 sp1 and > encounter ICE in the following code: Sorry I don't have MSVC 7.1 to test against. Fwiw I dropped your code (copy/paste) into g++ 4.0 and it compiled, linked and ran without any memory leak or other memory related problems. -Howard > > > <code> > > #include <cstdlib> > #include <string> > #include "unique_ptr.hpp" > > > class Base > { > protected: > explicit Base( std::string const & src ) > { > target.reset( new char[src.length() + 1] ); > memcpy( target.get(), src.c_str(), src.length() ); > target[src.length()] = '0'; > } > > explicit Base( boost::unique_ptr<char[]> src ) > : target( move(src) ) > {} > virtual ~Base() {} > > private: > boost::unique_ptr<char[]> target; > }; > > class Derived : public Base > { > public: > explicit Derived( std::string const & src ) : Base( src ) {} > explicit Derived( boost::unique_ptr<char[]> src ) > : Base( move( src ) ) {} > virtual ~Derived() {} > }; > > int main(int argc, char * argv[]) > { > char const TEXT[] = "This is a text"; > boost::unique_ptr<char[]> ptxt( new char[sizeof(TEXT)] ); > Derived drv( move( ptxt ) ); > return 0; > } > > </code> > > Here is the exact compiler output: > > 1>c:\prj\vs2005\projects\unique_tsts\unique_tst\unique_tst.cpp(21) : > fatal error C1001: An internal error has occurred in the compiler. > 1>(compiler file 'f:\dd\vctools\compiler\utc\src\p2\ehexcept.c', > line 1454) > 1> To work around this problem, try simplifying or changing the > program near the locations listed above. > 1>Please choose the Technical Support command on the Visual C++ > 1> Help menu, or open the Technical Support help file for more > information > 1>Build log was saved at "file://c:\prj\VS2005\Projects\unique_tsts > \unique_tst\Debug\BuildLog.htm" > 1>unique_tst - 1 error(s), 0 warning(s) > > Is something wrong with my code or is it a "pure" MSVC bug? > > TIA > > -- > Sergey Skorokhodov > > _______________________________________________ > Boost-users mailing list > Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

1 0

Thoughts on make_shared and shared_from_this in a constructor
by Peter Dimov 07 Mar '09

07 Mar '09

Let's take an example make_shared overload: template< class T, class A1, class A2 > boost::shared_ptr< T > make_shared( A1 const & a1, A2 const & a2 ) { boost::shared_ptr< T > pt( static_cast< T* >( 0 ), detail::sp_ms_deleter< T >() ); detail::sp_ms_deleter< T > * pd = boost::get_deleter< detail::sp_ms_deleter< T > >( pt ); void * pv = pd->address(); // #1 ::new( pv ) T( a1, a2 ); pd->set_initialized(); T * pt2 = static_cast< T* >( pv ); boost::detail::sp_enable_shared_from_this( &pt, pt2, pt2 ); return boost::shared_ptr< T >( pt, pt2 ); } The primary problem with calling shared_from_this in a constructor is that a shared_ptr to the object does not exist yet and may never will. But, when using make_shared, at the line marked //#1 we do have a shared_ptr that owns the storage of the future object T. So we should, in principle, be able to return a copy of it from shared_from_this. Unfortunately, we can't just move the sp_enable_shared_from_this call to #1 because (a) we can't convert an yet-unconstructed T to its enable_shared_from_this base if there's virtual inheritance along the way, and (b) even if we could, we can't initialize the weak_this_ member since it's not constructed yet. I can't think of a good way to pass this shared_ptr to the enable_shared_from_this base since we have no control over T.

2 3

Future or Property Tree?
by Ryan Gallagher 07 Mar '09

07 Mar '09

Forwarding a question that someone asked in a trac bug, "Will PropertyTree? make it into Boost 1.39.0???": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1989 I guess this has to be asked at least once a year. ;-) http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/171719/ >From this thread it appears that the original author, Marcin, may no longer be available to maintain this library. Was this ever confirmed? However, a year ago Sebastian mentioned that he would be willing to support the library. I don't know if this offer is still good, but it seems that we should figure out what we're doing with this library. There was a list of items in the following thread about what Marcin felt should be done before the release: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/171825/ In that thread Marcin wrote: """ IMO the issues that should be addressed before release are: - Simplification by removing some of the template arguments (arguable - maybe someone is using that?) - Figure out which parsers are unneccessary and get rid of them (cmdline parser?) - Get some docs toolchain to work properly and provide up-to-date docs. Lots of the text can be ported over (and my monkey english corrected from the original docs. - Speedup through use of a custom container (to replace std::list, needs some profiling work if it's even worth it) """ I believe that some of the parsers were already removed from svn. In the first link I posted (the trac ticket) were some patches I gave a long time back for the docs in quickbook form + doxygen. However, these were just meant to be a start based upon the original documentation (with a few English grammar corrections) and aren't really release-ready quite yet. (I'd have to see about getting the doc toolchain setup again myself, which I don't remember working so well on Windows, though Linux didn't give me any major problems.) On top of this list, at this point I think there would may be a few patches to review and apply from Trac. Do we have a committed maintainer? Can we make any plan of action for making this library release-ready or are we giving up on it? -Ryan

2 3