- Boost - lists.boost.org

boost [fusion]: tests failing in develop branch
by Aparna Kumta 17 Jun '15

17 Jun '15

Several regression tests for develop branch fail today. http://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/oracle-spar… "../libs/fusion/test/algorithm/copy.cpp", line 8: Error: Could not open include file<boost/fusion/container/vector/vector.hpp>. "../libs/fusion/test/algorithm/copy.cpp", line 9: Error: Could not open include file<boost/fusion/container/list/list.hpp>. Is this known? Thanks, Aparna

2 1

Boost::Filesystem
by Amit Kumar 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

Hi All Is there any functionality in boost::filesystem to identify local drives on Linux box. I want something similar to windows API *GetDriveType*(). Regards Amit

2 1

Preliminary submission of Boost Synapse
by Emil Dotchevski 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

I've made changes to Boost Synapse (a signal programming library) in part based on feedback I received on the Boost mailing list, and I've uploaded the updated source code and documentation to github: http://zajo.github.io/boost-synapse/. There is also a new tutorial: http://zajo.github.io/boost-synapse/Tutorial.html. I welcome more feedback. Thanks, Emil Dotchevski <http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode>

2 4

[config] Using SD-6 macros
by Edward Diener 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

I realize I may be late to the discussion, but what is the reason why Boost.config does not use the SD-6 macro functionality as the first check for all C11 and C14 related configuration options ? Is it because Boost.config feels that the few current SD-6 implementations are buggy ? As I understand SD-6 the implementation of SD-6 itself can always be checked effortlessly by an #if defined(__SOME_SD6_MACRO) before attempting to use the functionality defined by SD-6, so for the majority of compilers which do not implement SD-6 functionality yet Boost.config can always and easily fall back on its current checks. But for those compilers which do implement SD-6 ( latest clang and gcc 5.1.0 ) surely using SD-6 is easier than the many clever ways which Boost.config currently finds out how compilers and standard libraries are configured.

9 33

Re: [boost] boost [fusion]: tests failing in develop branch
by Lee Clagett 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Aparna Kumta <aparna.kumta(a)oracle.com> wrote: > Several regression tests for develop branch fail today. > > > http://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/oracle-spar… > > "../libs/fusion/test/algorithm/copy.cpp", line 8: Error: Could not open > include file<boost/fusion/container/vector/vector.hpp>. > "../libs/fusion/test/algorithm/copy.cpp", line 9: Error: Could not open > include file<boost/fusion/container/list/list.hpp>. > > Is this known? > > > Thanks, > > Aparna > > Yes, a pull request [1] was merged that was marked as a WIP. Another pull request [2] has already been made. The new pull request re-introduces those files - they were moved in [1], and [2] adds them back with new a new header that includes the original (now moved) files. Kohei Takahashi is eventually trying to replace the pre-processor based variadics with true variadics when compilers support it [3]. Joel or Kohei would have to provide more specifics on that effort, but it will be interesting if any compilation time improvements result (hopefully!). Lee [1] https://github.com/boostorg/fusion/pull/80 [2] https://github.com/boostorg/fusion/pull/81 [3] https://github.com/boostorg/fusion/pull/57

1 0

[hana] Review
by edouard＠fausse.info 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

Dear all, Please find attached my review of Hana. > - Whether you believe the library should be accepted into Boost > * Conditions for acceptance Definitely yes. I just have a very minor remark considering the documentation. > - Your name Edouard Alligand > - Your knowledge of the problem domain. I have been writing C++ professionally for 15 years and done a lot of TMP for many software project, for things such as compile-time introspection for serialization, enhanced checks at compile-time to improve correctness and compile-time pre-computations. I've done that with Boost.MPL, Boost.Fusion and some custom MPL. > You are strongly encouraged to also provide additional information: > - What is your evaluation of the library's: > * Design I am very much impressed by the design of Hana and the cleverness of the usage of C++ 14 lambdas. > * Implementation As far as I can judge it is very well implemented. > * Documentation I think writing "using namespace boost::hana" for the documentation is confusion. I know it might be nit-picking, but I think the example is easier to understand when you read struct Fish { std::string name; }; struct Cat { std::string name; }; struct Dog { std::string name; }; auto animals = boost::hana::make_tuple(Fish{"Nemo"}, Cat{"Garfield"}, Dog{"Snoopy"}); instead of struct Fish { std::string name; }; struct Cat { std::string name; }; struct Dog { std::string name; }; auto animals = make_tuple(Fish{"Nemo"}, Cat{"Garfield"}, Dog{"Snoopy"}); Because if you read diagonally (and let's be realistic, we all read diagonally documentation) you might miss what is going on. At least some namespace alias would be helpful. I personally think redundancy is good in documentations. > * Tests There is a satisfactory number of tests and the developer does continuous integration. The developer tests on several compiler versions at every change which is a must for a MPL. > * Usefulness Boost.Hana is extremely useful, especially the compile-time introspection it adds. It uses macros but as long as the language doesn't provide features to do compile-time introspection, there is no way around this (that I can think of) It has a lot of algorithms out of the box (at least I couldn't find one I would need that was missing). I like the compile-time arithmetic part of the library and find it very convenient. I'm a big fan of Boost.Fusion and I use Boost.MPL a lot. Hana replaces both libraries and compiles faster at the cost of requiring recent compilers. It is, to me, a very acceptable tradeoff. > - Did you attempt to use the library? If so: > * Which compiler(s) Clang 3.5 on FreeBSD 10.1 and libc++ > * What was the experience? Any problems? The only problem I have with Hana is that it doesn't work with Visual Studio. The lack of VS is the only reason why we didn't adopt Hana on our product. Nevertheless, I don't think it a showstopper. Hana is an advanced MPL and the problem will solve by itself with time. It works, in my opinion, on a sufficient number on platforms at the moment to be accepted into Boost. > - How much effort did you put into your evaluation of the review? I ran by the examples again as I would if I were trying the library for the first time. I have been following Boost.Hana since Louis' presentation at last year cppcon in Bellevue, Wa. Kind regards. --Edouard

2 1

different Problem cross-compiling against boost.context for Raspberry Pi (2)
by Biddiscombe, John A. 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

When compiling HPX against the now built boost, I have this error message /home/biddisco/apps/boost-1_58_0/include/boost-1_58/boost/context/execution_context.hpp:202:52: error: âstd::index_sequenceâ has not been declared std::index_sequence< I ... >) { index_sequence appears to be c++14, I'm using -std=c++11, can one tell if this likely a mistake on my part somewhere, or a possible problem with boost.context? (Is there a BOOST_FLAG_SOMETHING, I should add to prevent t being used?) thanks JB

2 3

[Advice] Documenting the "refined by" relation for concepts
by Louis Dionne 15 Jun '15

15 Jun '15

Dear all, When documenting a concept in a generic library, it is common to include what this concept is a "refinement of", i.e. which other concept(s) it specializes. For example, see the ForwardContainer concept from the SGI STL [1], which is a refinement of the Container concept. I find documenting this relation very useful. However, I have never seen the reverse relation of being "refined by" documented. It has been suggested to me [2] that Hana should document this "refined by" relation. Having never seen it done before, I'd like to know what the seasoned generic library writers think about it. The possibilities I personally see are 1. It's just not useful, and that's why it's not done 2. It's actually harmful, because you can't predict who is going to refine a concept 3. There's no "logical" reason behind this, it just happened to work that way in the SGI STL and everybody else followed that lead. Any input is appreciated. Regards, Louis [1]: https://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/ForwardContainer.html [2]: https://github.com/ldionne/hana/issues/104

5 10

Genetics library - advice needed.
by Andy Thomason 15 Jun '15

15 Jun '15

Hi All, I am getting close to rolling out the first draft of our genetics library. https://github.com/andy-thomason/Boost.Genetics This library allows you to search gene sequences - most commonly the human genome - (eg. ENSEMBL .fa files) for inexact matches. At present the library emphasises thoroughness over performance but the latter will improve. The algorithms are all single-threaded at present as the user should provide the thread control. Feedback would be useful. I appreciate that this is still a little way from being a final submission, in particular we need: * documentation * more examples (currently only a python binding example) * more tests I'll be setting these as a task for my students. Don't expect it to build and run out of the box except for the unit tests and they might not wor in 32 bit builds. I'd also apreciate help with the build system as getting a build on 64 bit windows is a challenge for Boost.Python at present and some wisdom would go far. Are there plans for VC2013/15 solution generation from BJAM? That would be useful. Is there a continuous integration system we could use to pre-check the library? Andy. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

5 7

[Graphs] Bug in directed edge-connectivity algorithm
by Michele Borassi 15 Jun '15

15 Jun '15

Dear all, my name is Michele Borassi, and I am a user of Boost Graph library, version 1.58.0. I have found a problem in the edge connectivity algorithm: if the input is a directed path with 3 vertices (0, 1, 2) and 2 edges ((0,1), (1,2)), the output is 1 (while it should be 0, since the graph is not strongly connected). However, if edge (1,0) is added, the output becomes (correctly) 0. A minimal working example that shows this issue is attached; my output is: Path of 3 vertices and 2 edges. The edge connectivity is 1. Added edge (1,0): now there are 3 edges. The edge connectivity becomes 0. Could you also explain me which is the best way to report a bug? I have checked your web page http://www.boost.org/development/bugs.html, but all links seem to be broken. Waiting for your answer, I thank you in advance, Michele Borassi

4 5