- Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] interest in a "signal flow" library?
by james.jones＠firstinvestors.com 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

From: "Stjepan Rajko" <stipe(a)asu.edu> > Yes - this brings up a downside of the current choice of using >>= and > >=, they are too similar and reading them can be confusing. || (or | > maybe) would be a much better choice than >=, as you suggest. > > The reason for using >>= is that, for something like: > > source > || (path11 >>= path12 >>= path13) > || path2 > > to work, (path11 >>= path12 >>= path13) has to be evaluated right to > left in order for the expression to evaluate to path11 which needs to > connect to source. Similarly, || needs to evaluate left to right so > that both path11 and path2 connect to source. > > As far as binary operators that get evaluated right to left go, we're > pretty much stuck with different assignment operators, which would > prevent us from using >> for >>=. > > Although, there could be an altogether different scheme that would > make using >> (or <<) possible :-) Not an altogether different scheme, but why does: path11 (op) path12 have to evaluate to path11? Why can't it evaluate to a proxy object which refers to path11? As long as it does this, you don't need to worry about order of evaluation. (path11 (op) path12) (op) path13 evaluates to proxy(path11) (op) path13 evaluates to proxy(path11) Proxies are a wonderful trick. :) - James Jones Administrative Data Mgmt. Webmaster 375 Raritan Center Pkwy, Suite A Data Architect Edison, NJ 08837

1 0

Re: [boost] [serialization] performance comparison
by brass goowy 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

Martin Slater writes: >> I'm using MSVC8.0, Boost 1.33.1, and software from www.webEbenezer.net >> to build the tests. > >I had a look at your site and couldn't find any download available for >your serialisation library so I could run performance comparisons, is >there a link to where it can be downloaded from? There isn't a library to download. Its an online service. It takes a high level description of an interface and sends back a C++ implementation of the interface. I used the following as a "Middle" file when I tested. Msgs (set<int>) (list<int>) (list<int>, deque<int>) } The } is unmatched - at least for now. There are a couple of hand written files that you can get from the site that go with the output from the site. See the Middleware Service page for those files. This page might be helpful: http://www.webEbenezer.net/sendsample.cc Brian Wood _______________________________________

2 1

Missing files?
by Jan Van den bosch 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

Hi, I'm trying to build the examples of the Channel event framework ( channel.sourceforge.net) Apparently, the Boost archives at sourceforge (.zip, .tar.gz and .tar.bz2 files) are missing several necessary files, like serialization/array.hpp. When I do a CVS checkout of Boost however, those files are included. Why is this? Are they still part of Boost? Thanks in advance, Jan

2 1

[1.34.0] intel-vc8-win-9.1 errors
by Sean Huang 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

There are quite a few intel-vc8-win-9.1 errors but it seems they are all caused by a single problem shown below. If we can find a workaround for this problem then intel 9.1 + VC8 can be added back to the release platforms. See Huang-WinXP-x86_32 test results in the regression reports at http://engineering.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/CVS-RC_1_34_0/developer/in dex.html. Intel(R) C++ Compiler for 32-bit applications, Version 9.1 Build 20070109Z Package ID: W_CC_C_9.1.034 Copyright (C) 1985-2007 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. icl -Qvc8 "-Qlocation,link,c:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\Bin" ..\libs\xpressive\test\c_traits.cpp -FoG:\BoostRegressions\RC_1_34_0\results\boost\bin.v2\libs\xpressive\test\c_ traits.test\intel-vc8-win-9.1\debug\debug-symbols-off\threading-multi\c_trai ts.obj -TP /Od /Ob0 /W3 /GR /MDd /Zc:forScope /Zc:wchar_t /Qwn5 /Qwd985 -Qoption,c,--arg_dep_lookup /Zc:forScope /Qansi_alias /Zc:wchar_t -D_NATIVE_WCHAR_T_DEFINED /wd4675 /EHs -D _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE -D _SCL_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE -c -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -I.. c_traits.cpp .\boost/xpressive/detail/utility/boyer_moore.hpp(64): error: more than one instance of overloaded function "std::fill_n" matches the argument list: function template "void __cdecl std::fill_n(_OutElem (&)[_Size], _Diff, const _Ty &)" function template "std::_Enable_if<<expression>, void>::_Result __cdecl std::fill_n(_OutIt, _Diff, const _Ty &)" argument types are: (unsigned char [256], int, unsigned char) std::fill_n(this->offsets_, uchar_max + 1, this->length_); ^ detected during: instantiation of "boost::xpressive::detail::boyer_moore<BidiIter, Traits>::boyer_moore(const boost::xpressive::detail::boyer_moore<BidiIter, Traits>::char_type *, const boost::xpressive::detail::boyer_moore<BidiIter, Traits>::char_type *, const Traits &, bool) [with BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator, Traits=boost::xpressive::detail::default_regex_traits<boost::iterator_value< std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::type={std::iterator_traits<std::basi c_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::value_type={std::_String_const_itera tor<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::_Alloc>::value_type={char}}}>::type]" at line 36 of "..\boost/xpressive/detail/core/finder.hpp" instantiation of "boost::xpressive::detail::boyer_moore_finder<BidiIter, Traits>::boyer_moore_finder(const boost::xpressive::detail::boyer_moore_finder<BidiIter, Traits>::char_type *, const boost::xpressive::detail::boyer_moore_finder<BidiIter, Traits>::char_type *, const Traits &, bool) [with BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator, Traits=boost::xpressive::detail::default_regex_traits<boost::iterator_value< std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::type={std::iterator_traits<std::basi c_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::value_type={std::_String_const_itera tor<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::_Alloc>::value_type={char}}}>::type]" at line 49 of "..\boost/xpressive/detail/core/optimize.hpp" instantiation of "void boost::xpressive::detail::optimize_regex(boost::xpressive::detail::regex_imp l<BidiIter> &, const Traits &, boost::mpl::true_) [with BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator, Traits=boost::xpressive::detail::default_regex_traits<boost::iterator_value< std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::type={std::iterator_traits<std::basi c_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::value_type={std::_String_const_itera tor<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::_Alloc>::value_type={char}}}>::type]" at line 49 of "..\boost/xpressive/detail/static/compile.hpp" instantiation of "void boost::xpressive::detail::static_compile_impl2(const Xpr &, boost::xpressive::detail::regex_impl<BidiIter> &, const Traits &) [with Xpr=boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<char, boost::proto::binary_op<boost::proto::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::mar k_placeholder, boost::proto::noop_tag>, boost::proto::unary_op<boost::proto::as_op<boost::proto::op_proxy<boost::pro to::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::any_matcher, boost::proto::noop_tag>, void>, true>::type, boost::proto::unary_plus_tag>, boost::proto::assign_tag>, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, char, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator, Traits=boost::xpressive::detail::default_regex_traits<boost::iterator_value< std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::type={std::iterator_traits<std::basi c_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator>::value_type={std::_String_const_itera tor<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::_Alloc>::value_type={char}}}>::type]" at line 64 of "..\boost/xpressive/detail/static/compile.hpp" instantiation of "void boost::xpressive::detail::static_compile_impl1(const Xpr &, boost::xpressive::detail::regex_impl<BidiIter> &) [with Xpr=boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<char, boost::proto::binary_op<boost::proto::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::mar k_placeholder, boost::proto::noop_tag>, boost::proto::unary_op<boost::proto::as_op<boost::proto::op_proxy<boost::pro to::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::any_matcher, boost::proto::noop_tag>, void>, true>::type, boost::proto::unary_plus_tag>, boost::proto::assign_tag>, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, char, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator]" at line 86 of "..\boost/xpressive/detail/static/compile.hpp" instantiation of "void boost::xpressive::detail::static_compile(const Xpr &, boost::xpressive::detail::regex_impl<BidiIter> &) [with Xpr=boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<char, boost::proto::binary_op<boost::proto::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::mar k_placeholder, boost::proto::noop_tag>, boost::proto::unary_op<boost::proto::as_op<boost::proto::op_proxy<boost::pro to::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::any_matcher, boost::proto::noop_tag>, void>, true>::type, boost::proto::unary_plus_tag>, boost::proto::assign_tag>, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, char, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator]" at line 91 of "..\boost/xpressive/basic_regex.hpp" instantiation of "boost::xpressive::basic_regex<BidiIter> &boost::xpressive::basic_regex<BidiIter>::operator=(const Xpr &) [with BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator, Xpr=boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<char, boost::proto::binary_op<boost::proto::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::mar k_placeholder, boost::proto::noop_tag>, boost::proto::unary_op<boost::proto::as_op<boost::proto::op_proxy<boost::pro to::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::any_matcher, boost::proto::noop_tag>, void>, true>::type, boost::proto::unary_plus_tag>, boost::proto::assign_tag>, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, char, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type]" at line 77 of "..\boost/xpressive/basic_regex.hpp" instantiation of "boost::xpressive::basic_regex<BidiIter>::basic_regex(const Xpr &) [with BidiIter=std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char>>::const_iterator, Xpr=boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<boost::lazy_enable_if_c<true, boost::proto::binary_op_generator<char, boost::proto::binary_op<boost::proto::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::mar k_placeholder, boost::proto::noop_tag>, boost::proto::unary_op<boost::proto::as_op<boost::proto::op_proxy<boost::pro to::unary_op<boost::xpressive::detail::any_matcher, boost::proto::noop_tag>, void>, true>::type, boost::proto::unary_plus_tag>, boost::proto::assign_tag>, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type, char, boost::proto::right_shift_tag>>::type]"

1 0

[Review][Bimap] Reviewers needed for Bimap review
by Ion Gaztañaga 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

Hi to all, Bimap review started 5 days ago and we're having some good comments but no thorough reviews. I would like to encourage people to write a Bimap review, because we still have five more days and I would propose extending that if that's necessary. Container and STL experts, we need you! I think that Bimap is a great library and I'm pretty sure you'll be happy to review it once you start reading the docs. Start reading the documentation here: http://tinyurl.com/y95qng And download the library here: http://boost-consulting.com/vault/index.php?&directory=Containers Regards, Ion

7 7

[serialization] typo in basic_binary_iprimitive::load_binary
by Vyacheslav E. Andrejev 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

Hello, File boost/archive/basic_binary_iprimitive.hpp contains two typos in the body of basic_binary_iprimitive::load_binary function definition. The first typo is in line 163: std::streamsize s = count / sizeof(Elem); std::streamsize scount = m_sb.sgetn( static_cast<Elem *>(address), s ); if(count != static_cast<std::size_t>(s)) // line 163 Should be instead: std::streamsize s = count / sizeof(Elem); std::streamsize scount = m_sb.sgetn( static_cast<Elem *>(address), s ); if(scount != static_cast<std::size_t>(s)) // line 163 And the second typo is in line 174: Elem t; scount = m_sb.sgetn(& t, 1); if(count != 1) // line 174 Should be instead: Elem t; scount = m_sb.sgetn(& t, 1); if(scount != 1) -- Vyacheslav E. Andrejev System Architect, Optech International, Inc. E-mail: mortituris(a)mail.ru

3 5

[Review][Bimap] Reviewers needed for Bimap review
by Tom Brinkman 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

>> As review manager for the Intrusive library, I've got no objections to >> that review being delayed, if it's also OK with the wizards. I prefer the term "Review Queue Manager". Anyways, the rule of thumb is that we try to keep the reviews from overlapping and to give any who wants to give a review, a chance to do so. Its generally fair to say that anytime a "Review Manager" feels that an extension is needed, we would "re-juggle" the schedule to accomodate that request. In general, just contact Ron or myself, and let us know what your plans are so that we can coordinate the review dates with the other libraries in the queue.

1 0

Re: [boost] interest in a "signal flow" library?
by Stjepan Rajko 21 Feb '07

21 Feb '07

> From: Paolo Coletta <paolo(a)rcpstudio.it> > Subject: Re: [boost] interest in a "signal flow" library? > > Is there any interest in a library which facilitates the > > implementation and interconnection of objects using Boost.Signals? > > Yes, much interest. > [snip] > I didn't look at the library yet, however, in a similar context I had the > requirement to perform some operations in parallel. Thus, I wonder if this > could be supported by the syntax, e.g., > > video_generator >>= ( effect1 && effect2 ) >>= image_sum >>= display > > where effect1 and effect2 are executed in parallel (for example, by > different threads of a thread_group); image_sum (which expects two > arguments) is executed only when both effect1 and effect2 are completed. That would be a good addition - right now you would have to do something like: video_generator >>= effect1 >>= image_sum >>= display; video_generator >>= effect2 >>= image_sum; (or) video_generator >= (effect1 >>= image_sum >>= display); >= (effect2 >>= image_sum); - both of which are more awkward than video_generator >>= ( effect1 && effect2 ) >>= image_sum >>= display. Also, image_sum would have to take care of receiving the two signals separately (which would probably require a use of slot_selector in the end) and combining them together after both are received. I'll think about this and try to add it in. Thanks! Stjepan

1 0

Re: [boost] interest in a "signal flow" library?
by Stjepan Rajko 21 Feb '07

21 Feb '07

> <james.jones(a)firstinvestors.com> wrote: > > * I'm wondering whether the choice of operators (operator(), >>=., > > >=) used is appropriate or whether there are better alternatives. > > Sounds cool. I'd probably prefer to use >> and/or << as operators, though, if for no other > reason than they're already overloaded by iostreams, so as library users we're used to > expecting that overload. >>= isn't similarly overloaded, so it's something of a surprise. > operator() isn't bad either, but << or >> are better visually. > > I wonder if a different operator (maybe || ?) could be used to create trees? Or maybe that > gets confusing. Your example would become: [snip] > because the latter implies that display2 gets input from the parenthesized sequence in >the middle, which isn't the case (if I understood it correctly). Yes - this brings up a downside of the current choice of using >>= and >=, they are too similar and reading them can be confusing. || (or | maybe) would be a much better choice than >=, as you suggest. The reason for using >>= is that, for something like: source || (path11 >>= path12 >>= path13) || path2 to work, (path11 >>= path12 >>= path13) has to be evaluated right to left in order for the expression to evaluate to path11 which needs to connect to source. Similarly, || needs to evaluate left to right so that both path11 and path2 connect to source. As far as binary operators that get evaluated right to left go, we're pretty much stuck with different assignment operators, which would prevent us from using >> for >>=. Although, there could be an altogether different scheme that would make using >> (or <<) possible :-) Great suggestion, thanks! Stjepan

1 0

[Boost-bugs] [ boost-Patches-1665485 ] random library - (1 more) local variable shadow patch
by SourceForge.net 21 Feb '07

21 Feb '07

Patches item #1665485, was opened at 2007-02-21 19:13 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by jmaurer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=307586&aid=1665485&group_… Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Christopher Saunders (ctsa) >Assigned to: Jens Maurer (jmaurer) Summary: random library - (1 more) local variable shadow patch Initial Comment: A simple patch to rename arguments which shadow method names in random/uniform_real.hpp and random/detail/uniform_int_float.hpp ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Jens Maurer (jmaurer) Date: 2007-02-21 21:17 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=53943 Originator: NO Thanks, applied. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=307586&aid=1665485&group_… ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Boost-bugs mailing list Boost-bugs(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-bugs

1 0