- Boost - lists.boost.org

Boost and clang under Windows
by Edward Diener 30 Sep '13

30 Sep '13

First off I am not of course proposing any changes to the upcoming release build of Boost 1.55 for clang under Windows. It turns out that clang under Windows, possibly to support the ability to use Windows header file, becomes another compiler which defines _MSC_VER. I believe the Intel compiler also does this but there may be some others. However clang is a much more strictly conforming to the C++ standard compiler than VC++ and does not have VC++'s quirks. This presents a problem in Boost. The Boost header files have numerous places where testing the macro _MSC_VER produces slightly different behavior based on the fact that the code is being used by VC++ or a compiler with the same behavior as VC++. But clang does not have the same behavior as VC++ despite defining _MSC_VER. Can I go ahead and change some of these situations as necessary to get clang under Windows to work properly with Boost code ? The usual change will be to test not only _MSC_VER but also that __clang__ is not defined for keeping the current implementation which assumes a VC++ compatible compiler with VC++ behavior. I am willing to make those changes in 'trunk' and keep an eye out for any significant failures in unit tests for our current regression tests. I have already made a slight change to Boost PP config.hpp on 'trunk' so that clang for Windows will pass the preprocessor tests. I am willing to work on other changes but I do not want to go ahead and do so if the maintainers of other libraries see any reasons for me not making the changes on 'trunk'. Of course I will test any changes I make locally to make sure they do not affect any other _MSC_VER defined compilers as well as with VC++. But the changes themselves should be fairly simple, just adding a check that __clang__ is not defined as part of the VC++ type behavior. Obviously something like the many tests for _MSC_VER in order to specify #pragma once will not change but some other situations will to exclude clang from the _MSC_VER functionality.

9 20

[clang][Windows] Volunteer for a Boost regression test runner for Clang on Windows
by Beman Dawes 30 Sep '13

30 Sep '13

Chandler Carruth has asked for a volunteer to start running boost regression tests for the Clang on Windows project. For more about this project, see http://blog.llvm.org/2013/09/a-path-forward-for-llvm-toolchain-on.html. Chandler cornered me at the C++ committee meeting last week, and emphasized how much they would like to see boost tests passing using Clang in a Visual Studio environment. This would be a big plus for boost developers and users in the Windows environment IMO, so I hope we can help them out. This project is at an early stage, and many boost tests currently fail, so there is a lot of work to be done. --Beman

4 7

[scope_exit] D-style scope(failure) and scope(success) in C++
by Evgeny Panasyuk 30 Sep '13

30 Sep '13

Hello all, D language has scope(exit), scope(success) and scope(failure) features - http://dlang.org/statement.html#ScopeGuardStatement : "... scope(exit) executes NonEmptyOrScopeBlockStatement when the scope exits normally or when it exits due to exception unwinding. scope(failure) executes NonEmptyOrScopeBlockStatement when the scope exits due to exception unwinding. scope(success) executes NonEmptyOrScopeBlockStatement when the scope exits normally. ..." Andrei Alexandrescu describes some of uses cases for scope(exit), scope(success), scope(failure) at his recent talk : http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2012/Three-Unlikely-Suc… There is Boost.ScopeExit library which emulates D's scope(exit) via BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT macro, but there are no analogues for D's scope(failure) and scope(success). Current alternative for these features is ScopeGuard idiom ( http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/More_C%2B%2B_Idioms/Scope_Guard , http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/generic-change-the-way-you-write-excepti/1844037… ). Boost.ScopeExit library itself suggests to use ScopeGuard - http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_51_0/libs/scope_exit/doc/html/scope_exit/al… : " Boost.ScopeExit is similar to scope(exit) feature built into the D programming language. A curious reader may notice that the library does not implement scope(success) and scope(failure) of the D language. Unfortunately, these are not possible in C++ because failure or success conditions cannot be determined by calling std::uncaught_exception (see Guru of the Week #47 for details about std::uncaught_exception and if it has any good use at all). However, this is not a big problem because these two D's constructs can be expressed in terms of scope(exit) and a bool commit variable (similarly to some examples presented in the Tutorial section). " I have made small library ( https://github.com/panaseleus/stack_unwinding#d-style-scope-guardsactions ) which supplies primitives (class unwinding_indicator, UNWINDING_AWARE_DESTRUCTOR macro) to determining when object destructor is called due to stack-unwinding or due to normal scope leaving. Currently it is implemented on top of platform-specific implementation of uncaught_exception_count function and tested on: {MSVC2005, MSVC2008, MSVC2010, MSVC2012, GCC4.1.2, GCC4.4.6, Clang3.2}x{x32, x64}x{default settings}. uncaught_exception_count is a function similar to std::uncaught_exception from standard library, but instead of boolean result it returns unsigned int showing current count of uncaught exceptions. Such primitives allow us to implement scope(success) and scope(failure) features in C++. I have made several proof-of-concepts: * https://github.com/panaseleus/stack_unwinding/blob/master/examples/scope_ac… * https://github.com/panaseleus/stack_unwinding/blob/master/examples/example_… * https://github.com/panaseleus/stack_unwinding/blob/master/examples/scope_gu… * https://github.com/panaseleus/stack_unwinding/blob/master/examples/boost_sc… boost_scopes.cpp example shows usage of BOOST_SCOPE_FAILURE and BOOST_SCOPE_SUCCESS: try { cout << "Case #1: stack unwinding" << endl; BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT(void) { cout << "exit" << endl; } BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT_END BOOST_SCOPE_FAILURE(void) { cout << "failure" << endl; } BOOST_SCOPE_FAILURE_END BOOST_SCOPE_SUCCESS(void) { cout << "success" << endl; } BOOST_SCOPE_SUCCESS_END throw 1; } catch(int){} { cout << "Case #2: normal exit" << endl; BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT(void) { cout << "exit" << endl; } BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT_END BOOST_SCOPE_FAILURE(void) { cout << "failure" << endl; } BOOST_SCOPE_FAILURE_END BOOST_SCOPE_SUCCESS(void) { cout << "success" << endl; } BOOST_SCOPE_SUCCESS_END } Output is: " Case #1: stack unwinding failure exit Case #2: normal exit success exit " Currently BOOST_SCOPE_FAILURE and BOOST_SCOPE_SUCCESS are implemented based on boost_1_51_0/boost/scope_exit.hpp by copy-paste and replace (just for proof-or-concept, of course it is possible solution with much less duplication). Semantically meaningful changes can be viewed as diff at https://github.com/panaseleus/stack_unwinding/commit/d5513404323490ea99d9b6… Before posting here, I made posts on several C++ forums, but unfortunately get only a few feedbacks regarding ScopeFailure and ScopeSuccess. What do you think? Thank you. P.S. Related discussion: http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2010/09/171051.php Best Regards, Evgeny Panasyuk

6 27

Program Options library and Unicode compliance
by munsingh 30 Sep '13

30 Sep '13

I noticed that the class option_description does not work with wstring, instead works with string. Does anyone has any idea why is it so? Regards, Manish -- May the force be with you

2 1

[clang] How to use CLang for Windows?
by Daryle Walker 30 Sep '13

30 Sep '13

There was a recent conference where the Clang team announced a version of Clang that's supposed to work on Windows (as opposed to kind-of working if you try real hard). It's accessible from the command line if you put Clang in the PATH. I just found out it's supposed to be used from Visual Studio ('10 or '12) after tweaking a project's settings. Can it be used from out BJam system? How will it find right header files to use? (Does it automatically use the ones from MSVC?) Daryle W.

8 36

Code to address the requirement 7(a) of Boost.IOStreams Roadmap
by Gene Panov 29 Sep '13

29 Sep '13

Colleagues, I posted this before, but didn't get answers to some questions so far. I think I possibly addressed the "output" part of requirement 7(a) from the IOStreams Roadmap https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/IostreamsRoadmap in this library https://code.google.com/p/async-ostream/ Does it make sense if I create a patch for Boost.IOStreams to add those five files and ask the maintainer (or volunteers) for feedback? Regards, Gene

1 0

[variant] Stalled testing, from missing file.
by Rene Rivera 29 Sep '13

29 Sep '13

Note to the variant maintainers.. I commented out a test which was referring to a non-existent source file. -- -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo

3 2

[range][algorithms] How about making the range algorithms pipeable as the range adaptors are?
by Viktor Sehr 28 Sep '13

28 Sep '13

It would be syntactically really nice if the stl-algorithms wrapped in boost range were pipeable, as with the adaptors, making it seamless to combine them in left-to-right statements For non-mutating algorithms I think it's an obvious evolvement const auto& max_pos = some_range | filtered(..) | max_element; const auto& num_elements = some_range | filtered(..) | count(42); ...instead of inside out as it is now const auto& max_pos = max_element(some_range | filtered(..)); const auto& num_elements = count(some_range | filtered(..), 42); For non-mutating algorithms it might not be an obvious solution, as the range beneath is modified, but I still think it should be possible boost::erase(my_vector | sort | unique); ...instead of boost::erase(unique(sort(my_vector)); *Implementation example with std::accumulate:* // Tag to be recognized by the global pipe operatortemplate <typename value_type>struct accumulate_argument_tag { accumulate_argument_tag(const value_type& value) : value_(value) {} const value_type& value_; }; struct accumulate_tag { // Put the regular algorithm as an operator() function where the first argument is the range template <typename range_type, typename value_type> value_type operator()(const range_type& range, const value_type& start) { return std::accumulate(std::begin(range), std::end(range), start); } // If no range is provided, return a tag which contains the argument, which can then be identified by the global pipe operator template <typename value_type> accumulate_argument_tag<value_type> operator()(const value_type& value) { return accumulate_argument_tag<value_type>(value); } };static accumulate_tag accumulate; // Global pipe operator which takes one argumenttemplate <typename range_type, typename value_type>value_type operator|(const range_type& range, const accumulate_argument_tag<value_type>& argument_holder) { return std::accumulate(std::begin(range), std::end(range), argument_holder.value_); } // Global pipe operator which can accept 'accumulate' without any parenthesis// (assuming that std::accumulate can be used without arguments)template <typename range_type>typename range_type::value_type operator|(const range_type& range, const accumulate_tag&) { return std::accumulate(std::begin(range), std::end(range), range_type::value_type(0)); } // Usage std::vector<int> vec;for(size_t i = 0; i < 135; ++i) vec.push_back(i);auto a = accumulate(vec, 0);auto b = vec | accumulate(0);auto c = vec | accumulate; /Viktor

6 10

Borland and metrowerks compiler requirements?
by Stephen Kelly 27 Sep '13

27 Sep '13

Hello, In the work I've done so far on removing ifdefs for obsolete compilers, some compilers which have come up a few times are __BORLANDC__ and __MWERKS__. I have never used either of those compilers. Can old versions of either of them be dropped at this point in boost trunk? Thanks, Steve.

8 29

"Remove obsolete MSVC checks" and _MSC_VER
by Peter Dimov 26 Sep '13

26 Sep '13

One general note about these changes. This: #if defined( _MSC_VER ) && _MSC_VER >= 1310 doesn't mean "compiler is MS VC++ 7.1". It means "compiler claims to support MSVC 7.1's features." Many Windows compilers define _MSC_VER for compatibility. I'm not positive that the removal of the _MSC_VER >= part would break something nowadays, but if it does, this would be why. I'd have left these alone; it's not clear what purpose removing the check is intended to serve, apart from breaking code. Actual MSVC-specific code is guarded by BOOST_MSVC and not _MSC_VER.

3 11