- Boost - lists.boost.org

[TR1] std_run_random failure with VC9 SP1
by Richard Webb 13 Aug '08

13 Aug '08

The std_run_random test is failing on VC9 SP1 (http://tinyurl.com/64xsr5) seemingly because the mersenne_twister implementation doesn't like being seeded with 0: /////////////// void seed(unsigned long _X0 = default_seed) { // set initial values from specified value _RNG_ASSERT(0 < _X0, "invalid argument for mersenne_twister::seed"); /////////////// Is that a bug in SP1, or an incorrect test? Thanks, Richard Webb

4 6

Compiling program_options v1.35 on msvc9.0 fix
by evert.vandewaal＠imtech.nl 13 Aug '08

13 Aug '08

2 1

[1.36.0] Release packaging problems
by Beman Dawes 13 Aug '08

13 Aug '08

Grrr... 1.36.0 is up on SourceForge, but due to a screw-up on my part the .bz2 and .gz files don't include the generated docs. The .7z and .zip files do have the generated docs. The problem was caused by having to run some of the release process on Windows, some on Linux, and then combining the pieces by hand. That's a result of doc changes breaking the doc build on Windows. I'm going to be out of the office all day on non-Boost business, so won't get a chance to work on straightening out the mess until late today or tomorrow. --Beman

1 0

Unordered Link on beta.boost.org doesn't work
by Hansi 13 Aug '08

13 Aug '08

Hi, the link under "New Libraries" "Unordered" doesn't work. Best regards Hansjörg

2 1

[trac] Settings link broken
by Maik Beckmann 13 Aug '08

13 Aug '08

Hi, If I click on the word "Settings" in {{{ * Use the >>Settings<< link at the top of this page to let us know your email address even if you don't have a Trac userid. ... }}} I get {{{ Error: Not Found No handler matched request to /trac/boost/settings }}} Regards, -- Maik

2 2

[1.35] thread problem : get_timespec and get_xtime
by Alexander Dong Back Kim 13 Aug '08

13 Aug '08

Dear all, I'm using GCC 3.4 on REHL machine. I used to use BOOST 1.32 until yesterday and upgraded to 1.35 last night and now I can't compile my project =( I'm using boost thread library and it worked really well but doesn't work at all after the upgrading. The error message from g++ is... /usr/local/include/boost-1_35/boost/thread/pthread/timespec.hpp: In function `timespec boost::detail::get_timespec(const boost::system_time&)': /usr/local/include/boost-1_35/boost/thread/pthread/timespec.hpp:18: warning: missing initializer for member `timespec::tv_nsec' In file included from /usr/local/include/boost-1_35/boost/thread/pthread/condition_variable_fwd.hpp:12, I know this is just a warning but I wonder how I can clear this warning. Any suggestions are welcomed. Thanks =) -- Alexander Dong Back Kim

2 5

contradictory information in FS docs?
by Noah Roberts 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

"Class basic_directory_iterator is an important component of the library. It provides an input iterator over the contents of a directory, with the value type being class basic_path." That seems to be correct. "The expression itr->path().leaf() == file_name, in the line commented // see below, calls the leaf() function on the path returned by calling the path() function of the directory_entry object pointed to by the iterator." But that claims the object pointed to the iterator is something other than basic_path and appears to be quite in error. itr->path() fails to compile. Documentation is same for both 1.34 and 1.35 - tested on 1.34. This appears in both the front page and the docs for directory iterator. The find_file function doesn't actually compile if copied verbatim. Need to remove all calls to path() on the iter and replace with "*itr".

2 2

Visual Studio 2008 SP1 released
by Michael Marcin 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

Contains many nice fixes and enhancements including their own version of boost::swap. http://blogs.msdn.com/vcblog/archive/2008/08/11/visual-studio-2008-service-… http://blogs.msdn.com/vcblog/archive/2008/08/11/tr1-fixes-in-vc9-sp1.aspx Thanks, Michael Marcin

3 2

Re: [boost] [unnullable_ptr] Proposal for a new library
by Alp Mestan 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

Hi, Sorry, had many things to do. I'm having many errors when trying to compile the Test file you've put with the header. Here are some of the errors : http://rafb.net/p/TGP3FO40.html PS : I've renamed the header and put it in the boost include dir. -- Alp Mestan --- http://blog.mestan.fr/ --- http://alp.developpez.com/ --- In charge of the Qt, Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence sections on Developpez

2 8

[review] FSM Review Starts Today August 11th
by Martin Vuille 12 Aug '08

12 Aug '08

The formal review for Andrey Semashev's Finite State Machines (FSM) library begins today and will run until the 20th. The documentation (overview and reference) is available online: http://boost-extension.redshoelace.com/docs/boost/fsm/doc/state_machine.html http://boost-extension.redshoelace.com/docs/boost/fsm/doc/reference.html The current submission is available from the sandbox vault at http://tinyurl.com/yjozfn (or http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=FSM.zip &directory=&PHPSESSID=48493076c1ea60ae316f7b60f15b9ed1, if you prefer.) There has already been some discussion of the library since the rewiew was first announced: http://www.nabble.com/FSM-Review-Announcement-to18820219.html http://www.nabble.com/FSM-Review-Reminder-to18890305.html ----------- Description ----------- "The main goals of the library are: * Simplicity. It should be very simple to create state machine using this library. * Performance. The state machine infrastructure should not be very time and memory-consuming in order to be applicable in more use cases. * Extensibility. A developer may want to add more states to the existing state machine, and this addition should be relatively safe since it shouldn't interfere with the existing states. The developer should also be able to specify additional transitions and events for the machine with minimum modifications to the existing code." "Boost.FSM vs. Boost.Statechart There is another library in Boost that provides similar functionality: Boost.Statechart. Although it currently covers almost all major Boost.FSM features and provides ones that are not supported in this library, Boost.Statechart is more targeted to creation of big and complex state machines with possibility of distributed development. But this does not come at no price and Statechart has little tools for compile-time programming and does not provide as much run-time performance as Boost.FSM does. So there are main guidelines for users to make a decision between Boost.FSM and Boost.Statechart: [...]" "The following compilers are known to have problems or most likely will have ones: * Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 and 7.0. Most probably will fail to compile due to lack of partial template specialization support. * Borland C++ Builder 5.5.1 (free version). Fails to compile due to lack of partial template specialization and in-class using declarations support. Some other minor problems also have been noticed. Newer versions of the compiler have not been tested. * OpenWatcom 1.5. Fails to compile due to problems with Boost.MPL code. Newer versions of the compiler have not been tested. * SunPro C++ Compiler 5.5 for Solaris (SPARC). Most likely will show problems with function overload resolution. Newer versions of the compiler have not been tested." The current submission is available from the sandbox vault at http://tinyurl.com/yjozfn (or http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=FSM.zip &directory=&PHPSESSID=48493076c1ea60ae316f7b60f15b9ed1, if you prefer.) ---------------------------------- What to include in Review Comments ---------------------------------- Your comments may be brief or lengthy, but basically the Review Manager needs your evaluation of the library. If you identify problems along the way, please note if they are minor, serious, or showstoppers. Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review: What is your evaluation of the design? What is your evaluation of the implementation? What is your evaluation of the documentation? What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems? How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study? Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? And, finally, every review should answer this question: Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. Thanks in advance for your participation in this review. MV

3 2