- Boost - lists.boost.org

Booster rockets
by Deane Yang 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

How about just an upward slanted "C++" with booster rockets on each side of it shooting out flames? You don't even need the word "boost" with that, but it could still be there as Dave has it.

2 1

[Program Options Library] Does Program Options Library support "sections" in config file?
by 周方 Frank Chow 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

For example, to connect different databases according to different requests, there are some options stored in a config file, like this: [DB1] server=172.16.21.1 database=dbname1 userid=someone1 password=xxxxxx [DB2] server=172.16.21.2 database=dbname2 userid=someone2 password=oooooo i.e. with same key name in different sectors. In Win32 API, this method is very handy: // to get "server" in "[DB1]" char buf[256]; GetPrivateProfileString (""DB1, "server", "", buf, sizeof(buf), "configfile.ini"); Is there a mechanism in "Program Options Library" to support this config file? Or, does it intend to support? Thanks!

2 1

logos with rockets
by David Abrahams 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

Here are some further attempts. Be sure to look at the first two slides. http://www.luannocracy.com/logo.ppt Sorry about the file format. I have been having trouble exporting these pictures accurately from PowerPoint. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com

7 11

RE: [boost] preprocessor fix
by Arias Brent-P96059 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

> Have you seen http://www.cuj.com/documents/s=8470/cujboost0306besser/? Yes, I have seen that before. I did not use it for several reasons: (1) I think the source for Besser's ENUM was not easily available, (2) my employer gets nervous when code "looks" too C++ oriented and gets nervous when macros become too "involved" - which means "lengthy" (3) Besser's ENUMX macro requires that you specify the number of parameters (e.g. ENUM3 or ENUM23). Reason #3 was a real hurdle for me - because I'm trying to provide this macro to other developers who might "rebel" if using the macro requires from them non-intuitive new concepts or exercises. That is, if they didn't have to count the number of parameters in the enumeration before - they may well reject the ENUM macro if it starts to require them to count the entries. So, I set out to make an ENUM macro that (1) didn't need its entries counted by the developer and (2) had a short definition (which makes it less daunting for "managment" buy-in). You said: >there are still basic notions of computation, etc., such as >control flow--which is nothing but a conditional "invocation" >of its accompanying code. Those kinds of things still apply >at the preprocessor level. What you really needed was a way to >conditionally enumerate some sequence elements, not enumerate a >conditional sequence. My implementation was "backwards" because I was unable to make the code compile otherwise. That is, depending on the value of ENUMS, the following code did not compile: > #define ENUM(name, start, entries) \ > BOOST_PP_EXPR_IIF(ENUMS)( \ > BOOST_PP_SEQ_ENUM( \ > (typedef enum { BOOST_PP_SEQ_HEAD(entries) = start) \ > BOOST_PP_SEQ_TAIL(entries) \ > (LAST_ ## name } name;) \ > ) \ > ) \ You said: >You can do it, but EXPR_IIF does not lazily evaluate its > argument (the syntax above is what EXPR_IIF would look > like if it *did* lazily evaluate it argument). >In other words, when ENUMS is 0, SEQ_ENUM will still be >invoked, but its results will be discarded. I'm not sure what you are suggesting. Depending on the value of ENUMS, the code snippet I showed above would not compile - lazy evaluation or not. If it won't compile, then there's nothing for me to ponder (except to use a different approach - which happily you taught me with the TUPLE_EAT macro). :) Paul, thanks so much for the help you've provided. -Brent

2 1

RE: [boost] Re: logos with rockets
by Brian Braatz 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

One could always shoot for the middle here, and have the BOOST word have "Jetpacks" on. I.e. evokes more of the power and energy Though, while I suggested that, I am not sure how to draw it :) > -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of Peter Petrov > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:26 PM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: [boost] Re: logos with rockets > > I don't think a rocket would be the most suitable symbol for Boost. To > me it communicates ideas like "flight" and "space", which obviously > don't fit very well. > > IMO, a much better variant would be a thunderbolt. It is commonly > associated with "power" and "energy", exactly in the spirit of the Boost > name. > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 1

Re: [boost] Logo substance. [was: Re: Logo... and page design.]
by JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

----- Mensaje original ----- De: Rene Rivera <grafik.list(a)redshift-software.com> Fecha: Lunes, Noviembre 22, 2004 11:06 pm Asunto: [boost] Logo substance. [was: Re: Logo... and page design.] > David Abrahams wrote: > > > "Peter Dimov" <pdimov(a)mmltd.net> writes: > > > >>I'm not a logo expert by any stretch of the imagination... but it > >>seems to me that if you have a rocket, you don't need the text > >>"boost". The rocket is the logo. It needs to have some unique visual > >>features that establish its identity as the "boost/C++" rocket, of > >>course. > > > > Interesting. But every logo I've seen includes the name of the > entity> it stands for somehow. > > Yes, and that's done to enforce the association between the logo > and the > company identity. Eventually the logo becomes synonymous with > the > identity and starts getting used more frequently without the name. > AT&T, > Cingular, Apple, and Motorola come to mind in that respect. > > > Even if the rocket isn't part of some "Boost" > > text, you need to choose a font for "Boost" and decide how it sits > > next to or below the rocket. > > True, but it will likely be easier to decide on the substance of > the > logo without the text. No distractions that way. Not that one > should > forget totally about the text. But it's much easier to think about > what > can represent Boost, without the word Boost in it. > > So far I see three different concepts for logo: > > 1) The "<>" brackets. > > 2) The "++" operator. > > 3) The rocket. > Thogu I prefer the ++ theme, here's a possible design for the rocket idea, kinda retro-style. The execution can be much improved, just wanted to know whether the general style feels OK. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

10 15

Ref documenation point of clarity
by Edward Diener 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

This may be seen as a nitpick by I think the generalized one-line explanation for 'ref', as well as the text in the 'ref' introduction should say "passing reference parameters to generic functions" rather than "passing references to generic functions".

3 6

Logo designs for Boost + Boost.Build
by Cromwell Enage 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

I guess I could throw in a couple of pennies into this discussion. I agree that we should try to pin down the logo's essential elements before submitting any prototypes. (If we *really* need pictures, we might consider setting up a Boost Wiki page for them.) IMHO, there are only two essential elements: Boost and ++. "Boost" should be there for the obvious reason, and "++" evokes enough of a positive association to the implementation language without having to say "C++". Why isn't "<>" an essential element? Because it's too solution-specific. For example, I can't imagine a Python programmer wanting to use Boost.Python because it utilized templates. Boost.PP is another great library that doesn't use templates at all, though it works great with them. Finally, Boost is the proving grounds for libraries that are candidates for the entire C++ standard, not just the STL. Of course, w/out the "C++" element, there's no point in using "/", either. Now that I've proprosed the elements, I think the idea of using the pre-increment operator instead of post-increment should also be incorporated into the logo, so hard-core programmers could see at a glance that we value performance, too. Putting it all together, I believe the essence of the logo should be: ++Boost You could have the word "Boost" look like a space shuttle orbiter, as someone else suggested. The colors would be perfect, as orbiters are black and white (w/out the U.S. flag). The "++" would then look like smoke exhaust. The essence for the Boost.Build logo could then be ++Boost Build where "Build" would look like a rocket-launching truck. (A vehicle assembly building would be more accurate, but less resonant, not to mention too big.) One objection I could foresee with this idea would be that space shuttles might be phased out in the near future because of the last national tragedy involving them. Say anything you want about C++, that's one form of resonance I wouldn't want to evoke. Feel free to take my place in the bicycle shed if that's what we're ending up building :) Cromwell Enage __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com

2 1

RE: [boost] Re: logos with rockets
by Brian Braatz 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

I like page 5 the best IMO - a Couple of thoughts: * "Boost" is horizontal and not slanted- this evokes "Stability" (the slanted boost looks cool- but doesn't send the right message- i.e. it looks like a picture not hung properly) * care should be taken that the logo looks good in SMALL sizes and Large ones- this means that the image should not rely upon any distinctive features of the logo that do not show up well as a thumbnail When I worked at adobe (many years ago)- they actually had a "overall" logo for Adobe, and variations for large and small sizes Also- referring to #5, I suggest to bring the rocket down a little bit (because if you reduce the size this may not look properly) SUGGESTION- As this starts to settle, present the images of the logo in a SMALL MEDIUM and LARGE sizes- so that we can get a feel for what it looks like in those variations. That would be my my 2 cents :) > -----Original Message----- > From: boost-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] > On Behalf Of David Abrahams > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 4:01 PM > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: [boost] Re: logos with rockets > > Beman Dawes <bdawes(a)acm.org> writes: > > G> At 12:05 PM 11/23/2004, David Abrahams wrote: > > > > > >Here are some further attempts. Be sure to look at the first two > > >slides. > > > > > > http://www.luannocracy.com/logo.ppt > > > > The second one is a candidate, I'd say. > > There are more variations up there now. > > http://www.luannocracy.com/logo.ppt > http://www.luannocracy.com/logo.pdf > > -- > Dave Abrahams > Boost Consulting > http://www.boost-consulting.com > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0

Re: [boost] Re: Logo substance. [was: Re: Logo... and page design.]
by JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

----- Mensaje original ----- De: David Abrahams <dave(a)boost-consulting.com> Fecha: Martes, Noviembre 23, 2004 11:25 pm Asunto: [boost] Re: Logo substance. [was: Re: Logo... and page design.] > Rich Johnson <rjohnson(a)dogstar-interactive.com> writes: > > >>> I find this one too static, compared to Dave's attempts. > >>> It does have the sense of solidity that some have asked for, > >>> but I'd rather have a more dynamic feel (which reflects, I think, > >>> more accurately what boost is. Much of boost is not for the > >>> faint-hearted.) > >> > >> Thanks. Actually I thought that Joaquín's design was plenty > dynamic>> and better than mine on simplicity grounds. I do agree > about the ring > >> and the ++. Put a little white gap between the rocket and the > ring at > >> the intersection, and you've got your "C." > >> > > Hmm... two little puffs of exhaust could be +'s and the third > could be > > a 'C'-ring. It's kinda' cartoony, but fun. > > Or you could make the +es into four-pointed stars. > Like this? (again, this can be implemented more carefully, it's just a sketch to explore the idea.) Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

3 2