- Boost - lists.boost.org

BGL
by Siddhartha Sen 22 Feb '19

22 Feb '19

I looked up https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Google-Summer-of-Code:-2019 . No project ideas have been added for BGL as of yet, it seems. I hope there is something in BGL in this years GSOC, as I am really passionate about graphs and graph algorithms. Also, will you be mentoring this year? If not, do you have any information on the potential mentors for this BGL project? Thanks.

2 1

Re: [boost] Graph Algorithms
by Siddhartha Sen 22 Feb '19

22 Feb '19

Thanks for the feedback! But what if I focus on C++14 then? Is that a good idea? On Fri, 22 Feb, 2019, 6:14 PM Vinnie Falco, <vinnie.falco(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 12:49 AM Siddhartha Sen > <siddhartha99.sen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > From what I've read in the mailing lists, I think the demand has > shifted > > from C++11 to more modern versions, like C++14 and C++17. Anyways, > > thanks for the tip. Will you be mentoring this year? > > I will not be mentoring directly although I do offer advice on the mailing > list. > > People say they want C++14 and C++17 but I don't think its a good idea > to require those language versions in a library, because most people > are still on C++11. Have a look at the latest developer survey: > > <https://www.jetbrains.com/research/devecosystem-2018/cpp/> > > If a library requires C++17 then most C++ users will not be able to > use it. And this is bad for the library, because fewer users means > less testing, less feedback, less popularity, and in general this > makes the library not as good. > > In terms of the API (interface) of a library, C++17 does not offer > much more than C++11 except for things like, avalability of > string_view, variant. But Boost has these things already (e.g. > boost::string_view, boost::variant) and they work in C++11. So there > is really no benefit to C++17 other than some improvements in the way > you can write the implementation. But that doesn't affect users > directly. > > In summary, by requiring C++17 most users will be unable to use the > code, and there will be very little benefit to C++17 users. > > Regards >

3 7

BGL
by Siddhartha Sen 22 Feb '19

22 Feb '19

I apologise. Actually, there was a suggestion in the boost mailing lists that there is a demand for this. Anyways, I am familiar with C++14 and a C++17 as well(a bit). Will you be mentoring this year? I have already read the documentation of LEMON and started using it as well. Please let me know what should I do next, or if there are any particular issues you would like me to work on. Thanks. Regards. Siddhartha.

2 1

BGL: Graph11
by Siddhartha Sen 22 Feb '19

22 Feb '19

Hi, I am SIddhartha Sen, a second year student in Information Science and Engineering. I hope to contribute to the BGL. I have heard that there is some interest in themodernization of BGL using modern C++11 concepts for improved performance. Being a GSOC 2019 aspirant, I was looking for a potential mentor in this domain to pair up with and get started on this project. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank You.

2 1

PR not merged
by Sreejith S 21 Feb '19

21 Feb '19

I have sent a PR[1]. Can I know why the PR is still not merged ? [1]:https://github.com/boostorg/graph/pull/158 -- Regards, Sreejith.S Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham FOSS@Amrita <http://amfoss.in> | Github <https://github.com/sreejithsankar55> | Blog <http://sreejithsankar.wordpress.com>

1 0

Re: [boost] [build] PROBLEM specifying libc++!!!!
by Nikita Kniazev 21 Feb '19

21 Feb '19

> Anyone know how to do this and have the will to make life easier for > poor overworked library maintainers? I have `b2 <stdlib>libc++` on CI for Spirit with https://github.com/boostorg/spirit/blob/develop/.travis.yml#L119-L121 When I tried to make a PR I stuck at the thing that I do not know how (or it is not possible) to format (free-)future value into some flags, i.e: > toolset.flags clang-linux.compile OPTIONS <stdlib> : -stdlib=[ value-of-feature <stdlib> ] ; > toolset.flags clang-linux.link OPTIONS <stdlib> : -stdlib=[ value-of-feature <stdlib> ] ; But since in the wild there are two possible options it might be ok to just hardcode them for now.

1 0

[GIL] Contribution to the library.
by Gaurav Hoskote 21 Feb '19

21 Feb '19

This is to inform the concerned authority that I am willing to participate in GSOC 2019 and wish to contribute to the GIL library. I am a final year student and have good understanding of operations like Thresholding, Morphology and various filters. I have an idea of how the library works and I wish to contribute to it under the guidance of a mentor.

2 1

Image Processing for [GIL] Boost.
by Gaurav Hoskote 21 Feb '19

21 Feb '19

The Boost GIL library lacks image processing header files for operations like thresholding, morphology etc. I intend to contribute to this library by proposing some header files that can be placed in this library. I have worked on image processing algorithms before and am familiar with all the concepts.I wish to work under the mentorship of Stefan Seefeld who posted this project on github for GSOC 2019. I have attached a proposal pdf file (gilpro.pdf) to this email which gives details about my work and how the project will be implemented along with goals and milestones to be achieved. Also, for competency test I have attached a sample header file (threshold.h) which gives a basic idea of what I wish to implement for my project. Feedback would be appreciated. Regards, Gaurav Hoskote.

1 0

[build] PROBLEM specifying libc++!!!!
by Vinnie Falco 21 Feb '19

21 Feb '19

This is hard to teach, hard to remember, and error prone: script: b2 -j3 libs/beast/test toolset=clang cxxstd=11 cxxflags=-stdlib=libc++ linkflags=-stdlib=libc++ There's an issue to address it in a straightforward fashion: <https://github.com/boostorg/build/issues/287> Anyone know how to do this and have the will to make life easier for poor overworked library maintainers? Regards

1 0

[GSoC 2019] cpp_int Improvement
by Fenil Mehta 20 Feb '19

20 Feb '19

Hi, Integers with the capability to store large numbers has always been a requirement in C++ which has successfully been implemented by boost/multiprecision/cpp_int. Other languages such as Python and Java also supports such integer datatypes. I performed a speed test for C++ and python integers. While comparing speed of cpp_int and python int, I noticed that even though C++ source program was compiled with -O2 and -O3 flags, cpp_int was slow as compared for python int for multiplication and left-shift operations. The time taken for multiplication was: 1) cpp_int = 17.06 seconds 2) python int = 8.39 seconds I used the attached files to perform the testing on Linux. The execution time was measured using the time command. I would like to optimize this library. Being a GSoC aspirant, I was looking to pair up with a potential mentor in this domain who could guide me. Any feedback would be appreciated. Regards, Fenil Mehta

2 1