- Boost - lists.boost.org

Is it possiable to use a simple LOG(info) in boost log?
by hh h 15 Jan '19

15 Jan '19

Hi, After trying many days on boost log, still have many issues. Google log has a nice LOG(INFO) << "debug";, looks like that kind thing cannot do in boost log, the close online code in https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35895199/boost-log-and-severity-local-a… has to call LOGGABLE first then to use LOG(info) << "my log", it is really cumbersome, is it possible to call LOG(info) like glog? Thank you.

1 1

Boost.Build requirements to exclude GCC 5
by Niall Douglas 14 Jan '19

14 Jan '19

Outcome is now into Boost, and is being tested nightly: Docs in BoostDoc theme: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/develop/libs/outcome/doc/html/index.html Regression matrix: https://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/outcome.html One problem is how to exclude from testing GCC 5 which Outcome cannot support due to GCC 5's incorrect parsing of variable templates in nested template classes [1], so I need some sort of Boost.Build project requirement which explicitly excludes GCC 5. Unfortunately, GCC 5 appears to Boost.Config as fully implementing C++ 14, so this is not straightforward. What might work is to specify a requirement for one of the library items at https://github.com/boostorg/config/blob/develop/checks/Jamfile.v2 which we know for a fact libstdc++ 5 does not implement, but libstdc++ 6 does. However, clang with libstdc++ 5 would then be excluded incorrectly, as clang does not have this parsing bug. I guess ideally speaking Boost.Config gains a new test testing for this specific compiler parsing bug. But it seems a bit much to ask for this just for Outcome. Guidance is sought! Niall [1]: https://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/teeks99-02…

4 5

C++Now 2019 Submission Deadline
by Jon Kalb 14 Jan '19

14 Jan '19

The deadline for submitting to C++Now 2019 is just a few days away. If you’ve been thinking of submitting, please do not delay: http://cppnow.org/announcements/2018/12/2019-call-for-submissions/ <http://cppnow.org/announcements/2018/12/2019-call-for-submissions/> Thanks. Jon

1 0

High number of integer_sequence/index_sequence implementations
by Nikita Kniazev 14 Jan '19

14 Jan '19

Bunch of Boost libraries have their own integer_sequence/index_sequence implementation. Wouldn’t it be better if there was boost::integer_sequence/boost::index_sequence? boost\beast\core\detail\integer_sequence.hpp boost\callable_traits\detail\polyfills\make_index_sequence.hpp boost\context\detail\index_sequence.hpp boost\fusion\support\detail\index_sequence.hpp boost\mp11\integer_sequence.hpp boost\phoenix\core\detail\index_sequence.hpp (alias of fusion one) boost\poly_collection\detail\functional.hpp (uses mp11 one) boost\test\data\index_sequence.hpp boost\variant\detail\multivisitors_cpp11_based.hpp

4 4

(no subject)
by Siddhartha Sen 14 Jan '19

14 Jan '19

Hey, This is Siddhartha. I have been interested in contributing to boost and hopefully work with boost in GSOC 2019. I apologise for the delay as my exams were going on and I hope it is not too late to start. I have looked in to the ideas list as well as last year's projects. Currently, I am proficient in c and c++,especially algorithms,data structures and maths. Any help regarding how to get started would be appreciated. I myself have some ideas about implementation of a few libraries which I would like to discuss as well. Thank You

1 0

Regression matrix stopped updating
by Nikita Kniazev 13 Jan '19

13 Jan '19

For past month or two regression matrix update frequency was fluctuating in a big range, sometimes not updating for two-three days. As for now master is not updated for 7 days and develop for 5 days. https://www.boost.org/development/tests/master/developer/summary.html Summary: Master Report Time: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 01:44:54 +0000 https://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/summary.html Summary: Develop Report Time: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 06:05:04 +0000 Is it down for maintenance or what is going on?

6 8

Safe numerics at Meeting C++
by Robert Ramey 12 Jan '19

12 Jan '19

News Flash for both of you interested in the Boost Safe Numerics Library. Checkout https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=942&v=tcyb1lpEHm0 at 1 hour in. The whole rest of the talk is about a safe integer implementation written D. He uses it to illustrate his concept of "Introspective Programming". ALL the features and techniques he mentions (and more) are implemented in the safe numerics library. The Safe Numerics library is the Next Big thing! Robert Ramey

1 0

question/guidence regarding merge to master
by Robert Ramey 12 Jan '19

12 Jan '19

I'm looking to merge my develop branch into the master so that they will be in sync. I'm thinking that this the changed in develop should be squashed so that the master branch doesn't included all the the intermediate changes made during the develop phase. Is there any boost rule/practice/guidence regarding this?. Ideally, I'd like to see the master have only one set of consolidated changes for each release. But I'm not the person who decides these things or does the work. Any insight by other parties would be appreciated. Robert Ramey

10 29

Re: [boost] A class for embedded friendly callbacks.
by Bjorn Reese 12 Jan '19

12 Jan '19

On 1/4/19 1:30 PM, Mikael Rosbacke via Boost wrote: > I'm Mikael Rosbacke and new to this list. The last couple of months I've > been writing on a class for storing callbacks to different forms of > callables (member functions, functors, free functions). The main focus A while back, a somewhat similar library underwent a formal review. You may want to read the review report to see if any of the comments applies to your library: https://lists.boost.org/boost-announce/2016/12/0484.php

1 0

Re: [boost] Feedback desired for reflective enum library
by Nir Friedman 12 Jan '19

12 Jan '19

I had to fill in the subject for this manually, because of settings for the mailing list. I really hope it ends up on the right thread. Apologies if it doesn't. Hi Geert, There is an ADAPT macro, which is similar to your concept of CONVERT_TO_WISE_ENUM. However, it does require listing the enumerators; after all there's no way to find them out after the fact or else this library wouldn't exist in the first place. That said, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "changing your whole codebase". To take advantage of wise enums, all you'd need to do is change the original enum declaration to the wise enum macro. Everything else in your codebase will continue to work exactly as before. No typedef shenangians are necessary. Changing the original enum declaration is exactly the same amount of work as writing an adapt macro, but you don't have to maintain the list of enumerators twice. So I can't imagine a reason to write things the way you have (unless you want a conditional build dependency on WISE_ENUM but that seems unnecessary). The ADAPT macro is designed to be use wise_enum functionality generically with enumerators whose source you don't control, and therefore cannot change the declaration. Hope that clarifies things. Cheers, Nir

1 0