- Boost - lists.boost.org

indirecter_unary, indirecter_binary
by Matthias Kaeppler 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

Hello, because of the lack of a generic adaptor which indirects operations on pointers to the pointees, i.e. sorting a collection of pointers with predicates applying to the pointees, I have come up with two classes, indirecter_unary and indirecter_binary which do exactly that (thanks again to the people from boost users and comp.lang.c++ for assisting me). Both adaptors accept adaptable function objects as well as plain functions. Ex.: inline int plus( int a, int b ) { return a + b; } // ... std::vector<int> vec; // ... std::sort(vec.begin(),vec.end(),indirect_binary(std::less<int>())); // ... std::transform(vec.begin(),vec.end(),vec.begin(),std::ostream_iterator<int>(std::cout,"\n"),indirect_binary(plus)); I have attached the source file. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated. -- Matthias Kaeppler

8 31

Re: [boost] [shmem] Uploaded to Vault+documentation questions...
by ION_G_M 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

Hi James, I missed your message in the big diggest! QuickBook seems to offer all that I need, so I will definitely look at it. >I've attached a larger sample based on your "Quick Guide" (which might >be out of date...). Take a look, and if your interested check out the >Boost Documentation list at >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs. There's quite >a bit happening with QuickBook. Ok, thank you for all. Regards, Ion

1 0

Visual Studio 2005 IDE: Improving Class View(() instead of (void)) [Repost]
by Pavel Chikulaev 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

Visual Studio 2005 Beta2 CTP December 2004 still uses (void) as empty parameter list in Class View, Add Member Wizard and other IDE windows. I am asking you: Is there any official paper that shows that syntax (void) deprecated? It's possible to retire current (void) syntax in VS's IDE in case of showing Microsoft Visual Studio developers some official paper that shows it. I am posting it here because I believe there are some of us who also dislike it VS and knows/reads some C++ official papers. P.S. As for me, It is really annoying.

2 2

RE: [boost] Logo Contest
by Mark Blewett 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

At 22:38 09/03/2005, you wrote: I really want to respond to a comment at the end of Reid's post.. but there are a few interesting comments on the way... so I've added my thoughts "Spot on. I'd further add that most of the best commercial logos are pretty simple--not all, but it's a lot harder to make a complex one appealing." I agree, and add a further comment. Yes there have been some well drawn/rendered logos, however many seem (IMHO to me) like taking a average idea, but adding as many effects to make it look good. What I think (and hope) we should be looking at is the concept, not the frills. "Without singling any of the entries out, I think that most of the currently-posted entries are too complex. As a side note, and not a very relevant one (maybe), it's pretty clear the list is populated by a mostly left-brained crowd; look at how many of the entries depend on word play, acrostics, and the like. " Again I agree.. there are a few graphical people here, but most are "left-brained crowd".. but what's Boosts target audience? It's actually a serious question.. first line would be developers.. so a "left-brained crowd" logo would be ok, second line are companies.. which probably don't look at the logo, more the legal use of boost. What I'm trying to say is most logo's are for the general population.. in the case of boost (unfortunately) we don't have world domination.. so we should be producing a logo for the selected target audience. "Not saying that's bad, but again, the logos people tend to remember are more likely to be graphic than semiotic. Yeah, I guess that one deserves a smiley, on the grounds of self-referential irony. So here: <g>. Now, if there were just a way to make emoticons tail-recursive...come to think of it, I'm surprised no one used recursion as a means of indicating "boostness." If it weren't too late, I'd maybe have a go at that. Although most of my ideas were based around shapes, color use, and shading." I agree with "graphic than semiotic" for the general population.. does it apply to potential Boost users? I'm not so sure... but believe its probably true. "Incidentally, I'm also surprised no one has tried to define a coherent color scheme, especially given that there *are* graphic designers present. Is it just that everyone unconsciously accepted the existing "cool" scheme? Only a couple of the entries even try to do much with color, and I can't find any consistency in the usage (possibly my fault; it's just a hobby with me). Okay, <\kibitz>" I started writing an email awhile back (which I didn't posted), commenting on various designs.. however writing it I felt as it I was actually questioning the process rather than the produced logos (I'm not knocking the designers or anyone else.. just questioning) Why I'm responding to your email is a similar thought... Before we have a boost logo, do we need to define the boost "colours", the boost "font".. the foundations of a "corporate" logo? Or another example, capitalization.. should should Boost be "boost", "Boost" or "BOOST".. my thought is "Boost" in documentation, and "boost" (because coding standards apply) in code. Buts what about in a logo? Going back to colours.. I'm not sure what you mean about the "existing cool scheme".. I presume variants of blue.. there's are good reasons... 1) (unfortunately) most of us are male (and our target audience).. and we have a preference for the colour. 2) Industry Conventions.. I posted a link awhile back (http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg75724.php) which gives another reason; <quote> I'm no expert either but http://graphicdesign.about.com/od/logotips/a/8logoelements_2.htm has a interesting point about colour which I haven't seen mentioned here; Works Within Industry Conventions Often there are consistencies among logos in certain industries, and following these conventions can help customers more easily identify what you do or what you sell. This doesn't mean you should sacrifice originality, but it does mean you (or the firm creating your logo design) should be aware of patterns among logos in your industry and somehow incorporate these consistencies into your design. For example, did you realize that the main color for the logos for Microsoft, IBM, Dell, Hewlett Packard and Intel is blue? The color blue is associated with stability and progress and has long been a standard color among high-tech companies. So if you were a technology company, you would probably want to incorporate blue into your logo design to take advantage of these positive built-in associations. </quote> I guess choosing a logo is very personal and emotive (compared to accepting, or not, a new library).. but personally I trust the judgement of the people here and the process.. discussion is the key I feel. Regards Mark

4 4

RE: [boost] Logo Contest
by Mark Blewett 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

At 01:57 10/03/2005, you wrote: Firstly there are a lot of things I agree with you in your previous post... and was responding to it because it was (I feel) it is good starting point (because it summarized a lot of my concerns) to make the comments to the list as a whole that I felt needed making, not against your own post... perhaps I should of been clearer about that. Unfortunately with a brief scan of your response.. your interpretation of my post maybe different, I guess I have a lot to learn about posting "correctly" here. >My personal take is that it says "safety" to an industry that's anything but >predictable. Which isn't to denigrate it. I like blue. Got blue color >schemes on all my machines (or teal, which is close). It just seemed that >no one had given it any thought, That's what I'm trying to say.. (ok doing it badly)... about getting the basics (things like colour / font / capitalization) sorted.. however perhaps these will come out in post selection changes. >and I was trying to, well, *goose* people a >bit, maybe get someone to try something else. If you noticed it as it >breezed past and sank, my one early attempt was blue, and I thought at that >time (seem to recall some posts that made me think that) we were supposed to >keep the old color, to minimize collateral changes to color in the page >content. I guess most of use like stability.. which is strange given the innovative libraries in boost. >As for "targeting the audience," I harbor a deep suspicion that just because >coders work with text doesn't mean they'll necessarily *respond* positively >to it. Sadly, I have a wee bit of experience to tell me that (don't ask, >don't tell <g>). For one thing, yeah, we're working in a text medium, but I >don't really think the bulk of us are really all that language-oriented. That's actually a very good observation! I'd been thinking of the day to day textual side.. not thinking of what goes on inside the mind. >I'd wager that better than 95% of the people who track this list are male >(which I do *not* say to belittle women, or even to suggest that the logo >should just target males--I'm just talking numbers), Unfortunately its the world we live in :o( >which dictates a pretty >strong statistical leaning towards problem-solving techniques based on some >form of physical visualization. (About to commit the sin of generalizing >from a single particular, but...) I'm about as language-oriented as it goes, >with an advanced degree in writing and Lit, but when I code, I *picture* >things. Abstract patterns of colored blocks, actually. It's subtle, but >there. Now, after all that disquisition, I'll observe that a text logo can >work. Good ones are pretty hard to do, but you can think of some if you >try. However, apart from IBM, can you really think of many others? Look >closely at HP's logo, or Motorola's, any of that ilk, and you'll see there's >a graphic component even to them. Hell, there's one to IBM's. Check out >what their trademark actually is. Block serif lettering in a particular >shade of blue, broken by horizontal drop-outs. Hmmmn. I'm looking at the >Dell logo on my monitor; not sure what it means to do. Looks like it's got >"lazy E syndrome." <g> It may be that a large percentage of the submissions >are text-based simply because that's the first idea anyone will have, on >average. I think you are right about the submissions, and right that perhaps (if I understand you correctly) an abstract logo is a better way to go. >I would say that, yes you *do* need to be thinking about all those >foundations, if you expect to get it trademarked, because anything not >explicitly specified in the description will *not* be considered part of the >trademark. You also have to be careful not to over-constrain the >definition, or you can arrive at situations where you can't claim copyright >protection for certain usages. For instance, a logo I once did (still think >it's my best) for a rock band was largely defined by a geometric pattern >that surrounded and dominated the opening capital of the band's name. There >was also a backdrop done in a flame scheme by airbrush, and I'd designed a >custom font for the name that echoed patterns in the geometric figure. The >description finally filed mentioned only the figure and the name. Including >the font would have forced the band to always use only that font. Likewise >the backdrop; that logo had to appear on a number of things, and lots of >them wouldn't have been conducive to having a lot of deep saturated reds, >oranges, and yellows on them. I'm speaking of US trademark law, of course. >I don't know the conventions in other countries. But yeah, I do think of >this process as "establishing a brand," in the full commercial sense. That's one of the thinks I was questioning in my head.. what's a logo.. why is a new one needed.. what I personally came back to each time was actually we are trying to establish a brand.. and that the logo is just part of it. Maybe my interpretation as a causal observer is wrong. >Were >I at liberty to drop names, I could tell you a tale of a company that >neglected to trademark a very important part of what had come to be a >long-established and well-known brand, and their main competitor simply >appropriated it for their own advertising, undoubtedly luring customers who >associated that very key thing with the wrong company. But I ain't. And I >ain'ta gonna. <g> Okay, Boost isn't a "company" in the traditional sense. >But it's got to work with laws designed for corporate protection, and that >means really working with them. That's an interesting comment, one which I'd never of thought of... has anyone? >Yeah, it's personal. Since Boost isn't a company I "own" or do branding for >though, I'm not emotional about it. If it's seemed that way, I apologize >for the impression I managed to import into my messages. Sorry what I meant was the choice of logo is personal and emotive to everyone here.. everyone has their own reasons, its not (as) logical like voting for a library submission. >And yep, >discussion is the key. Which is what we're doing, I thought. <g> Yeah.. and you have made me think of a few areas, problems, and ideas which I hadn't even considered before. Thanks! Regards Mark

1 0

Logo Contest
by Zoltan 'cad' Juhasz 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

Greetings! I suppose the "Boost Logo Contest Conversation" becames forming something philosophical :) I'm not a professional graphic artist any more, but have been worked as a graphic artist for some years. Although logo gives the face of the project, company, team etc., it does not determine the area of operation of the represented! I mean a logo doesn't need to reflect to all of the services a company provides and it's very hard to find a logo that looks great and tells everything about the company. Conclusion: sometimes that's good enough to have an impressive logo the emotional effect depends on the represented. However, I'm absolutely sure about the thing that the "user" will not spend any valuable minute on racking his brains about the very meaning of an abstract logo :). > Pepsi, Nike, Sun, Microsoft Windows, BMW, Toyota, Apple... The logos of these companies are really impressive and stylish, aren't they? In my point of view Nike, Sun and perhaps Pepsi have those logos that are great just by being a logo the others mentioned need to have the background meaning to catch the attention. Iconify: I share the opinion of those who think about the recognizability of a logo as a basic feature, especially by extremely tiny size... but I don`t think that we would need a sparated icon logo as well. Sometimes the logo itself can work as an icon: http://people.inf.elte.hu/cad/etc/boost/famous-logos.png Although the logo of the Infiniti company is completely abstract, it`s incredible: http://people.inf.elte.hu/cad/etc/boost/infiniti.png As I attended the competition I don`t judge anyone`s work, since I`m affraid I couldn`t stay objective.:) > Then I examine it, my first thought is: "what is it supposed to be?" > This is not good for a logo, IMO: when you look at a logo, it > should be clear that a it represents something concrete or that it > is a purely abstract design. (If a concrete representation is hidden > in what first appears to be an abstract design, that's okay too.) > The reason I find myself asking what this particular logo is meant > to represent, I think, is that it's not sufficiently complex to hold its > own as an abstract design. Once I ask myself what the logo represents, > I can only conclude that it depicts a stack of paper. This is a big > problem: > aside from the fact that Boost has little to do with a stack of paper, > stacks of paper are simply uninteresting. I would like to protect my 75th application by some words: a logo doesn't need to illustrate anything tangible, since everyone will think and feel by seeing the logo the way he concieves of the represented. Jonathan saws papers, I saws component layers. that is subjectivity. Zoltan 'cad' Juhasz

5 7

RE: [boost] Logo Contest
by Mark Blewett 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

[A repost with (hopefully) proper quoting.. thanks Jonathan, and apologies to everyone else for the previous post] At 22:38 09/03/2005, Reid Sweatman wrote: I really want to respond to a comment at the end of Reid's post.. but there are a few interesting comments on the way... so I've added my thoughts >Spot on. I'd further add that most of the best commercial logos are pretty >simple--not all, but it's a lot harder to make a complex one appealing. I agree, and add a further comment. Yes there have been some well drawn/rendered logos, however many seem (IMHO to me) like taking a average idea, but adding as many effects to make it look good. What I think (and hope) we should be looking at is the concept, not the frills. >Without singling any of the entries out, I think that most of the >currently-posted entries are too complex. As a side note, and not a very >relevant one (maybe), it's pretty clear the list is populated by a mostly >left-brained crowd; look at how many of the entries depend on word play, >acrostics, and the like. Again I agree.. there are a few graphical people here, but most are "left-brained crowd".. but what's Boosts target audience? It's actually a serious question.. first line would be developers.. so a "left-brained crowd" logo would be ok, second line are companies.. which probably don't look at the logo, more the legal use of boost. What I'm trying to say is most logo's are for the general population.. in the case of boost (unfortunately) we don't have world domination.. so we should be producing a logo for the selected target audience. >Not saying that's bad, but again, the logos people >tend to remember are more likely to be graphic than semiotic. Yeah, I guess >that one deserves a smiley, on the grounds of self-referential irony. So >here: <g>. Now, if there were just a way to make emoticons >tail-recursive...come to think of it, I'm surprised no one used recursion as >a means of indicating "boostness." If it weren't too late, I'd maybe have a >go at that. Although most of my ideas were based around shapes, color use, >and shading. I agree with "graphic than semiotic" for the general population.. does it apply to potential Boost users? I'm not so sure... but believe its probably true. >Incidentally, I'm also surprised no one has tried to define a coherent color >scheme, especially given that there *are* graphic designers present. Is it >just that everyone unconsciously accepted the existing "cool" scheme? Only >a couple of the entries even try to do much with color, and I can't find any >consistency in the usage (possibly my fault; it's just a hobby with me). >Okay, <\kibitz> I started writing an email awhile back (which I didn't posted), commenting on various designs.. however writing it I felt as it I was actually questioning the process rather than the produced logos (I'm not knocking the designers or anyone else.. just questioning) Why I'm responding to your email is a similar thought... Before we have a boost logo, do we need to define the boost "colours", the boost "font".. the foundations of a "corporate" logo? Or another example, capitalization.. should should Boost be "boost", "Boost" or "BOOST".. my thought is "Boost" in documentation, and "boost" (because coding standards apply) in code. Buts what about in a logo? Going back to colours.. I'm not sure what you mean about the "existing cool scheme".. I presume variants of blue.. there's are good reasons... 1) (unfortunately) most of us are male (and our target audience).. and we have a preference for the colour. 2) Industry Conventions.. I posted a link awhile back (http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg75724.php) which gives another reason; <quote> I'm no expert either but http://graphicdesign.about.com/od/logotips/a/8logoelements_2.htm has a interesting point about colour which I haven't seen mentioned here; Works Within Industry Conventions Often there are consistencies among logos in certain industries, and following these conventions can help customers more easily identify what you do or what you sell. This doesn't mean you should sacrifice originality, but it does mean you (or the firm creating your logo design) should be aware of patterns among logos in your industry and somehow incorporate these consistencies into your design. For example, did you realize that the main color for the logos for Microsoft, IBM, Dell, Hewlett Packard and Intel is blue? The color blue is associated with stability and progress and has long been a standard color among high-tech companies. So if you were a technology company, you would probably want to incorporate blue into your logo design to take advantage of these positive built-in associations. </quote> I guess choosing a logo is very personal and emotive (compared to accepting, or not, a new library).. but personally I trust the judgement of the people here and the process.. discussion is the key I feel. Regards Mark

1 0

Re: [boost] Re: RPC library
by Iain Hanson 10 Mar '05

10 Mar '05

On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 10:22 -0500, Caleb Epstein wrote: > On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:45:52 +0000 (UTC), Jarl Lindrud > <jlindrud(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > As for messaging vs RPC, I think the same thing applies; it is easier to > > > build an RPC layer on top of messaging than the other way around. > > > > If you have oneway RPC's, why would it be difficult to build messaging on top of > > that? The two seem to me to be almost the same thing. > > Messaging is often built on top of a broadcast or multicast transport, > so one does not need to locate or connect to a remote endpoint in > order to publish messages. In most, if not all messaging systems you do have connect to an end point. The remote server provides various QoS and you need to register your subject or channel and whether you are a push or a pull publisher. Oh 8-) I think I'm re-inventing the CORBA Notification service. What a surprise. > I don't think one-way RPCs are an adequate > replacement for publish-subscribe semantics like these if you have a > large fanout. Simple one-way RPCs don't have a return value and can't throw exceptions an so there not a good way for messaging if you want QoS other than best efforts. The fan out is irrelevant using multi-cast. /ikh

4 3

looking for Dietmar's thesis
by Max Khesin 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

Does anyone have a copy of Dietmar Kuehl's Master's thesis stashed somewhere? The ftp link is dead, and I cannot find mine. thanks, max This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

2 1

[shmem] Uploaded to Vault+documentation questions+misc
by ION_G_M 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

Hi James and all shmem users, Sorry for uploading to boost files but I had some problems with file size, so I uploaded to boost files instead. In boost vault you will fine a new folder (Shmem) with 3 new files: Shmem.2005-03-06.tar.bz2 //library Shmem.2005-03-06-doc-1.tar.bz2 //doc1 Shmem.2005-03-06-doc-2.tar.bz2 //doc2 Write now I am writing documentation with a text editor and it's just a pain. For this version, I've discovered the CDATA usage so I don't have to manually escape XML characters (<, >, &). I will have a look at Quickbook. Is there any way to "insert" a cpp file directly on the code using BoostBook/QuickBook? That would help me a lot to mantain example code without errors. I've also seen in unordered associative containers documentation that colored code is used and I'm very interested in that, but I don't know if that is provided by BoostBook or was created with an external tool. Regarding new version, there are some name changes, so please, forgive me. I don't plan any further name changes except after a boost review. I've tested it in Windows XP using visual 7.1 mainly and Linux 2.6 kernel (Suse 9.2) using gcc 3.4.1. But it's possible to be errors in some linux tests. For this version I don't have any atomic swap/inc/test function and I don't plan to have it, because library has grown so much that I prefer to polish a bit this. I agree that those functions would be very useful to implement lock-free allocators and structures. If win32 shared_mutex/shared_condition seem very rudimentary test/yield functions but I've not found any pthread-like process shared mutex/condition implementation in any place (the latest time I checked, cygwin, pthread-win32, Windows Unix Services, didn't support that) so I had to make this hack to go on. When I propose a review process, surely synchronization objects should be included/adapted to boost threads, but currently boost::thread's elements don't allow single threaded builds, so I can't use boost::xtime and scoped_locks in shmem when synchronizing two single threaded processes. That's why I've copied those classes in my library changing their name. One last thing: shared memory creation/destruction is not very portable, because I can't find a common implementation that suits win32/posix shared memory model (I mean shm_unlink behaviour). I've not found any valid implementation except using System V shared memory to emulate Win32 shared memory, but I want to use posix functions if available. Has anyone solved this before? Well, thank you for your comments and feel free to write if any problem is found. Regards, Ion

5 5