- Boost - lists.boost.org

Informal CMake meeting at CPPCon
by Robert Ramey 12 Jan '18

12 Jan '18

Thursday 28 Sept 8 AM at CPPCon a small group of us met to talk a little regarding the situation regarding support of CMake by Boost. I promoted this meeting as I've been concerned that the only discernible results of the recent Boost Steering Committee announcement on the subject was a certain level of antagonism among boost members regarding the subject. Participants ============ Robert Ramey (me) Rene Rivera Vinnie Falco Louis Dionne David Sankel Matt Calabrese This was a small but I think a representative group. After some preliminary back and forth, I think we agreed: a) Nothing was going change regarding the current build system until there was a real alternative in place. b) That we should support serious proposals to implement CMake support within boost. c) And that any such proposals should go through the Boost formal review process. Traditionally, the boost formal review process has never applied to boost tools so this would be a departure from traditional practice. d) Questions regarding the scope/implemention of such support for CMake can be handled within the formal review process. e) Other questions regarding support CMake and Boost, transition to new system, related requirements on boost libraries, etc. can be better addressed once we have some sort of consensus on the form that CMake support will take. I had contacted Paul Fultz who is the only one I know of that has proposed something specific to submit to formal review. He told me he couldn't do it at the time, but shortly there after posted such a request on the list. So I guess for now we're on our way. My motivation for posting this is to keep the boost community up to date on what's happening so that no one gets overly surprised when things start to happen. I'm not really soliciting feedback - though it wouldn't surprise me if I get some. Robert Ramey

9 18

[scope_exit] (Boost >= 1.65) VS 2015 internal compiler error in lambda
by Tobias Loew 12 Jan '18

12 Jan '18

Hi, starting from Boost version 1.65 and using VS 2015 Update 3 (MSVC 19.00) the following code raises an internal compiler error: fatal error C1001: An internal error has occurred in the compiler. (compiler file 'msc1.cpp', line 1468). With earlier Boost versions it compiles fine. Tobias -- Sent from: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-Dev-f2600599.html

3 8

Issue with bjam and building for NDK
by Robert Dailey 11 Jan '18

11 Jan '18

I filed an issue over at the Android NDK github page here: https://github.com/android-ndk/ndk/issues/616 When I invoke b2 to build boost using the standalone toolchain generated by the NDK, bjam seems to be wrapping the command in quotes, like "clang++". This throws off their logic in the clang++.cmd batch script. I was asked to test running b2 without quotes (e.g. clang++), but I am not sure how to do this. Could someone help me understand if this is a code change to b2? Or if there's a jam script somewhere I can modify? I'm not sure if this is a boost issue or an NDK issue at this point. I appreciate any help from the boost developers.

2 1

[contract] ready to release
by Lorenzo Caminiti 10 Jan '18

10 Jan '18

Hello release managers & all, Boost.Contract in master is ready to be added to the next Boost release (regression tests pass, docs are updated, etc.). What do I have to do to put https://github.com/boostorg/contract.git master into Boost release 1.67? Thank you. --Lorenzo

2 3

Potential Boost SAX library
by Oliver Adams 10 Jan '18

10 Jan '18

Hi all, I was wondering if a library I'm developing would be of value to the Boost community. It is basically an event-driven parsing/serialization library for common formats using a standard internal representation or simple pass-through conversions. Would anyone be interested in something like this being added to Boost? Thanks.

4 6

[outcome] Training video in post-Toronto std::expected<T, E>
by Niall Douglas 09 Jan '18

09 Jan '18

In preparation for the Outcome v2 review next week, reviewers may find the video of my Meeting C++ talk in Berlin last year useful to watch beforehand. The talk is a literature review covering all the WG21 papers related to the post-Toronto std::expected<T, E>, which is quite different to the Expected during the Outcome v1 review. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfMBLx7qE0I My thanks to Jens for prioritising the release of this video, and for running a great C++ conference. I'm still building a list of errata for the video, once complete I'll post a list underneath it. Any mistakes that I made, please do let me know, ideally with a timestamp offset into the video. My thanks to all those who are currently reporting so many, many bugs in the reference docs. I'll try my best to fix them all before end of next week, but keep them coming! Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/

1 0

Re: [boost] seeking endorsement for histogram library
by Bjorn Reese 09 Jan '18

09 Jan '18

I endorse boost.histogram.

6 11

[date_time] recommending upgrading the timezone database
by James E. King, III 07 Jan '18

07 Jan '18

The timezone database in Boost.DateTime doesn't have enough information in it to be accurate all the time. For example if a region changes time zone rules, when applying timezone only the current rule will be applied regardless of the date involved. If a region stops using daylight savings time, but a date/time falls before that rule change, it should still use daylight savings in printed output, correct? The IANA timezone database is more complete, and we could switch Boost.DateTime to use that instead. It is also maintained more frequently than the built-in one, which was last updated 7 years ago, and 4 years before that. Any thoughts on this? https://github.com/boostorg/date_time/issues/67 - Jim

2 1

Adding AppVeyor as a required check to a Boost repository on Github
by Edward Diener 07 Jan '18

07 Jan '18

I am trying to add AppVeyor as a required check to the boostorg/date_time repository on Github. I have gone through the step of adding 'develop' as a protected branch, checking "Require status checks to pass before merging", and checking "Require branches to be up to date before merging". The only thing that then appears in the settings for the protected 'develop' branch is: "Status checks found in the last week for this repository" is "continuous-integration/travis-ci" "required", which is checked. Nothing about AppVeyor whatsoever. Anyone know what the Github voodoo is for getting this to happen ? I see other Boost repository with both Travis-CI and Appveyor required checks but evidently the doc for doing this for AppVeyor is non-existent in Github.

1 0

[hash] Extract module from functional + std::hash_combine
by Daniel James 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

Hi, I'm planning to extract hash from functional into its own module, as that will apparently break the circular dependencies that functional is part of. Any objections? Also, any opinions on what the module should be called? 'hash' might suggest a more general purpose hash function, so maybe it should be called something more specific. Daniel

10 29