- Boost - lists.boost.org

[regex] [1.35]Problem with IPV6 validation windows XP
by Gopal_Haldar＠McAfee.com 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

Please can you send me the proper regular expression which will accept only all different type of valid IPv6 IP. Regards Gopal -----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of John Maddock Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 6:10 PM To: boost(a)lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [regex] [1.35]Problem with IPV6 validation windows XP Gopal_Haldar(a)McAfee.com wrote: >> Please let me know is it possible through boost or not. Apologies, I missed that message. >> passing any IPV6 IP >> But it is failed to validate ::ffff:12.12.12.12 format... >> Please see my code... >> >> bool IsValidIPv6String(wstring ipv6address) { wsmatch what; >> >> wregex >> expression(L"^((([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){7}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f] >> {1, >> 4}:){6}:[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){5}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:) >> ?[0 >> -9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){4}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,2}[0-9A >> -Fa >> -f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){3}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,3}[0-9A-Fa-f] >> {1, >> 4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){2}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,4}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}) >> |(( >> [0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){6}((\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2})) >> \b) >> \\.){3}(\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b))|(([0-9A-Fa >> -f] >> {1,4}:){0,5}:((\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b)\\.){ >> 3}( >> \b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b))|(::([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}: >> ){0,5}((\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b)\\.){3}(\b(( >> 25[ >> 0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b))|([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}::([0-9A >> -Fa >> -f]{1,4}:){0,5}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(::([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,6}[0-9A-Fa- >> f]{ 1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){1,7}:))$"); I don't see how any of the alternatives in that regular expression can match the string you give: the only alternative that could possibly match appears to be the "|(::([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,6}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})" part, but that can't match because your string uses "." as a separator between numbers, where as the expression only works with ":" as a separator. Which part of the regex did you expect should match? Also did you intend the \b's to be literal bell characters, or \\b's and hense regular expression operators (word boundaries)? HTH, John. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 1

[threadpool] v9 - some fixes -> 64bit Linux issue
by Oliver Kowalke 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

Hello, version v9 of boost.threeadpool is uploaded to boost.vault. I could test boost.threadpool on following platforms: working: Linux 2.6.23, 32 bit, gcc-4.2.4, Dual Pentium III (host os) Windows XP Prof., 32 bit, msvc-9.0, Core2Duo (guest os) OpenSolaris/Nexenta, 64 bit, gcc-4.2.1, Core2Duo (guest os) FreeBSD-7.0 (requires additonal option in kernel ->semaphores), 64bit, gcc-4.2.1, Core2Duo (guest os) not working: Linux 2.6.23, 64 bit, gcc-4.3. , Core2Duo (host os) -> segmentation fault Xp, OpenSolaris, Freebsd are virtualized (KVM) on Linux. The segmentation fault on Linux x86-64 semas to be related to the 4th argument of ::makecontext. In the code I pass the this-pointer of fiber_impl_wrapper. Does somebody have a solution for this issue? regards, Oliver -- GMX startet ShortView.de. Hier findest Du Leute mit Deinen Interessen! Jetzt dabei sein: http://www.shortview.de/wasistshortview.php?mc=sv_ext_mf@gmx

1 0

[serialization] RPC, IDL, XDR
by remi.chateauneu＠gmx.de 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

Is there an attempt to use boost::serialization and Sun's XDR routines to make remote procedure calls with C++ objects? IDL allows only to serialize plain C variables but it might be possible to wrap elegantly low-level XDR calls. Something like that: /// This wraps an XDR pointer into a pseudo-archive. struct xdr_archive { XDR * _xdr_ptr ; xdr_archive( XDR * xp ) : _xrd_ptr(xp) {}; bool_t operator & ( int & i ) { return xdr_int( _xdr_ptr, & i ); }; bool_t operator & ( float & f ) { return xdr_float( _xdr_ptr, & f ); }; ... } The advantage of this is that, if a class has a boost::serialization-compliant 'serialize' method, it becomes easily usable with RPC. For example: /// Sample structure/ struct MyStruct { int _i ; float _f ; template<class Archive > void /serialize( ///Archive & ar, const unsigned int version) { ar & _i; ar & _f; } friend void xdr( XDR * xp, MyStruct * sp ) { s->serialize( xdr_archive( xp ), 0 ); }; }; Although not losing the boolean return value of xdr functions is not straightforward (exceptions or a data member in xdr_archive ?), I would like to know whether it makes sense to use 'serialization' this way. The advantage would be: No need to use an IDL compiler such as rpcgen, less code maintenance, usability of XDR for C++ objects (not just C).

1 0

Re: [boost] [cryptography] concept
by Kasra Nassiri(Math & ComSci) 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

Hi Sebastian, > Asymmetric ciphers. I have little expertise in asymmetric ciphers, on the other hand, I need exponentiation functions for most of them, so I guess this needs to wait for the boost.mp_int and/or etc. I fact you might want to help me on that. > Also, I think cipher streams should be implemented at the stream buffer (or > boost.iostream filter) level. I am not entirely familiar with the boost.iostream interface could you elaborate more on that, please? kasra __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

[Boost.Config] Stlport patch for Sun compilers on Linux
by K. Noel Belcourt 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

Hi, I've attached a patch to fix this error with the sun compilers on Linux. http://tinyurl.com/6o4fxg I'm not well versed with the subtleties of Stlport (there may be better ways to code this). The patch merely avoids defining macro BOOST_NO_EXCEPTION_STD_NAMESPACE as the Stlport bundled with the Sun compilers on Linux seems to correctly put all type_info into the std namespace. The Sun compilers on Solaris still require this macro definition. I've tested that this fixes the type_info error with sun-5.9 on Linux and that it doesn't break the Sun tests on Solaris, okay to commit? -- Noel

4 12

[filesystem]Extracting path as string from wpath
by Johan Torp 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

How do convert a boost::filesystem::wpath to a known encoding in the native filesystem's path representation? Specifically I want to convert a boost::filesystem::wpath to a third party string (CFString from Carbon). In order to do that I must know the encoding of wpath.string() or wpath.external_file_string() on Mac, which is "implementation defined". Interfacing boost::filesystem::wpath with 3rd party APIs seems like common problem. Best Regards, Johan Torp www.johantorp.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-filesystem-Extracting-path-as-string-from-wpath-tp20… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

5 9

[serialization] In-memory archive?
by Ling Li 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

Is there an easy way to serialize into a in-memory archive so that an object can be, say, transferred over a network? Of course one can use a disk file as the intermediate step but having some in-memory archive should help here. Actually, as a related question, is there a way to serialize into and deserialize from some map-like in-memory archive? Just to illustrate the idea better, say we have a Point class. class Point { double m_x, m_y; public: Point(double x, double y): m_x(x), m_y(y) {} }; We can use the constructor Point(1.0, 2.0) to get an object. But how about if we want to construct a Point object from a std::map that has "x => 1.0; y=> 2.0" as its key-value pairs? I guess my example is too simple so that deserializing from a map is not necessary. But consider deserializing from a database, where one natural way to present the information is not a long binary string but a list of key-value pairs. Or consider a generic factory that takes in such a map and gives out a constructed object. Note that a map usually doesn't keep entries in order so this may add extra burden to the serializing code. Please let me know if what I am looking for is too crazy. Any input is appreciated.

4 6

Re: [boost] [regex] [1.35]Problem with IPV6 validation windows XP
by Gopal_Haldar＠McAfee.com 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

I am waiting for reply. Please let me know is it possible through boost or not. -----Original Message----- From: Haldar, Gopal Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:01 PM To: 'boost(a)lists.boost.org' Subject: [boost] [regex] [1.35]Problem with IPV6 validation windows XP passing any IPV6 IP But it is failed to validate ::ffff:12.12.12.12 format... Please see my code... bool IsValidIPv6String(wstring ipv6address) { wsmatch what; wregex expression(L"^((([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){7}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1, 4}:){6}:[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){5}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:)?[0 -9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){4}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,2}[0-9A-Fa -f]{1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){3}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,3}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1, 4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){2}:([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,4}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(( [0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){6}((\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b) \\.){3}(\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b))|(([0-9A-Fa-f] {1,4}:){0,5}:((\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b)\\.){3}( \b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b))|(::([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}: ){0,5}((\b((25[0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b)\\.){3}(\b((25[ 0-5])|(1\\d{2})|(2[0-4]\\d)|(\\d{1,2}))\b))|([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}::([0-9A-Fa -f]{1,4}:){0,5}[0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4})|(::([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){0,6}[0-9A-Fa-f]{ 1,4})|(([0-9A-Fa-f]{1,4}:){1,7}:))$"); if(regex_match(ipv6address, what, expression)) { // what[0] contains the whole string // what[1] contains the response code // what[2] contains the separator character // what[3] contains the text message. //if(msg) // msg->assign(what[3].first, what[3].second); return true; } return false; } -----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of John Maddock Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:30 PM To: boost(a)lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [regex] [1.35]Problem with IPV6 validation windows XP Gopal_Haldar(a)McAfee.com wrote: >>> Hi >>> I am using the regex library for checking the IPV6 validation. >>> Same expression I am using for javascript regular expression >>> verification. >>> But for IP format ::ffff:12.12.12.12 javascript regex api returing >>> valid IP and boost regex_match method returning invalid IP(Windows >>> XP). >>> Please help me to identify the problem. You're going to have to provide much more information: The exact regular expression used, The string you're matching against, and if possible the code you're using. Thanks, John. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 1

Re: [boost] thread build on solaris
by Edward Peschko 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

Eric, I don't want to be a hair-splitter, but I do think this message does belong in gcc - it's a question of functionality, and how easy to use gcc is. I am trying to move to gcc-4 for its technical improvements, but I'm finding that it seems to be far less forgiving than gcc-3. This is having the unfortunate side effect that a lot of packages that used to compile perfectly fine with gcc-3 are no longer doing so with gcc-4. IMO it should be flexible enough to 'do the right thing' when it can. >From the point of the user, it makes it far more user friendly than otherwise. Is there a flag, environmental variable, or some switch that I can use to make gcc-4 have the older, looser behaviour? (ie: to be backwards compatible with the large volume of code I compile and maintain). Here's another example I'm finding: Constructs of the form extern enum vtype iftovt_tab[]; are now failing with forgiving error: array type has incomplete element type This would be fine if it was code that I controlled - but the matter of fact is that this code is in /usr/include/sys/mode.h, which comes bundled with solaris 10, and the upshot is that I'm going to have to somehow hack solaris headers in order to make gcc-4.3.2 be able to compile perl-5.10.0. Which is just plain wrong. Ed On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 2:06 AM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou(a)libertysurf.fr> wrote: > [This is not appropriate for gcc@, please use gcc-help@] > >> That worked (thanks) but exactly why did it work? Shouldn't gcc be >> smart enough to realize that it is working either with a c++ file or >> linking to a c++ library? > > gcc is the C compiler, use g++ when you're compiling C++, gfortran when you're > compiling Fortran and so on. > > -- > Eric Botcazou >

2 1

[shared_ptr][repost] Ticket 2126 status?
by Andrey Semashev 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

Sorry to reiterate, but I think this issue is rather critical and it would be very nice to have it solved in the upcoming release. Peter, have you reviewed the patch I attached? I also attached it to the ticket. Peter Dimov wrote: > > Andrey Semashev: > > >> >> Is the ticket 2126: >> >> >> >> http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2126 >> >> >> >> actually fixed in trunk? The ticket is still open, but my code that uses >> >> enable_shared_from_this and make_shared runs fine on trunk. > > > > Interesting. No, I don't believe that trunk is OK. The constructor > > support just masks the problem. Try for example the following test: I tried to dig the code here and there. It seems like calling sp_accept_owner for the constructed object would settle the problem. I modified make_shared.hpp accordingly and tried your test on Linux (GCC 4.3), and it passed without errors. I also tried the make_shared_test.cpp test and it also passed. Please, find the patch attached. Is it valid?

3 2