- Boost - lists.boost.org

Boost.Application : Request for comments : Article / Thread Pool / Other Features / Documentation
by Renato Forti 08 Oct '13

08 Oct '13

Hi All, In this email I would like to discuss some areas of Boost.Application. 01) Thread Pool functionality One of the most recurring requests is that Boost.Application should provide Thread Pool functionality. A flexible Thread Pool can be a complex thing, need provide schedule polices, grow/reduce polices, Shutdown policies, deadline s and many others, and then I think that this feature devotes your own Boost library. The Boost.Application can be integrated easily with one Thread Pool provided by third parties, or the user can make one "specific" (Not flexible/Complex) to your needs, e.g.: I make a simple work queue model using Boost.Asio and Boost.Thread that I plug on Boost.Application, see these tutorial: * Creating a Work Queue (Thread Pool) Application Using Boost.Asio, Boost.Thread and Boost.Application http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/664709/Creating-a-Work-Queue-Thread-Pool -Application-Usin My question is: The boost users think that Boost.Application must provide a complex Thread Pool to be accepted? 02) Ideas (new features) So far these are the ideas proposed to improve Boost.Application: http://www.dokfile.com/appbeta3/docs/libs/application/doc/html/application/f uture.html What functionality do you think should already be included in the first release, and not only in future versions? (Please mention here!) If you have any other ideas, (or improvement of current list) please post here so that I can update the "TODO" session. 03) Articles About "Boost.Application" I published other articles about "Boost.Application" on Code Project Website. Code Project Tutorials * Create a Windows Service Application http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/662221/Create-a-Windows-Service-Applicat ion-Using-the-Boo 04) Documentation Feedback Also, the library documentation was updated. If someone can take a look! Please, tell me if this is a little more understandable. * On-Line Documentation http://www.dokfile.com/appbeta3/docs/libs/application/doc/html/index.html 05) Boost.Application Resources [Other Boost.Application Resources] * Download Last Version https://sourceforge.net/projects/boostapp/ Note that the latest version is (10/07/2013): Boost.Application_beta_3a_release_5.zip (1.4 MB) * Please Write a Review https://sourceforge.net/projects/boostapp/reviews Please send comments. (Specify if you think if the library should be accepted as part of boost) Thank you very much! -- Renato

4 6

1.55.0 beta 1 release candidates available for testing
by Marshall Clow 08 Oct '13

08 Oct '13

Release candidate files for 1.55.0 beta 1 are available at http://boost.cowic.de/rc/ As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. This helps ensure the candidates build OK before we push them out to SourceForge. The files (and associated md5s) are: 9fa020efb06f5485628c646451b927c6 *boost_1_55_0b1_rc1.tar.gz 02d26b038ac96f19c3478d0c45a63c9b *boost_1_55_0b1_rc1.tar.bz2 de5f7d60b2387c4fe3d03eb327f095a9 *boost_1_55_0b1_rc1.zip 7deb9063846873452e6ec6918cb75a87 *boost_1_55_0b1_rc1.7z Thanks, --The release managers

7 13

Boost result_of maintainer
by Daniel Walker 07 Oct '13

07 Oct '13

Hi all, I have been the maintainer of boost::result_of since Doug Gregor handed it over to me a few years ago, but my circumstances are changing, and I'm afraid it's time for me to hand the library over to someone else. Any volunteers? - Daniel

3 5

boost 153 interprocess_mutex much slower in windows 7 than xp?
by Noll, Jeffrey T UTAS 07 Oct '13

07 Oct '13

We have 3 processes that are synchronized with an interprocess mutex. Basically one of them has a multiplier which allows the others to run at a synchronized accelerated rate. Under XP we typically can get it to run at 5000 times realtime. New desktop refreshes are coming out running Windows 7 and the same code with faster machines with more memory are maxing out at 250 times with 95%+ cpu idle time. Am new to boost so am wondering if we're doing something wrong. Here's the crux of the code. 3 processes and some shared memory. Share memory defines struct ds_control_sync { boost::interprocess::interprocess_mutex mutex; //Mutex to protect access to the queue boost::interprocess::interprocess_condition cond_running; //Condition to wait when the control software is running boost::interprocess::interprocess_condition cond_timestep; //Condition to wait until the control software is to run again }; struct ds_plant_sync { boost::interprocess::interprocess_mutex mutex; //Mutex to protect access to the queue boost::interprocess::interprocess_condition cond_running; //Condition to wait when the plant software is running boost::interprocess::interprocess_condition cond_timestep; //Condition to wait until the plant software is to run again }; Control process has a thread that waits for a signal to run once. DWORD __stdcall Control_Sync (LPVOID) { scoped_lock<interprocess_mutex> lock(sm_control_sync->mutex); while (1) { sm_control_sync->cond_running.notify_one(); sm_control_sync->cond_timestep.wait(lock); ns_common::TimeProfile_Periodic (&sm_io->status.control_sync, &sync_first, &sync_time); Control_PWM (); if (control_run) { Control_Run (); control_run = FALSE; } else { control_run = TRUE; } ns_common::TimeProfile_Execution (&sm_io->status.control_sync, &sync_first, &sync_time); } } Plant process has the same sort of thing DWORD __stdcall Plant_Sync (LPVOID) { scoped_lock<interprocess_mutex> lock(sm_plant_sync->mutex); while (1) { sm_plant_sync->cond_running.notify_one(); sm_plant_sync->cond_timestep.wait(lock); ns_common::TimeProfile_Periodic (&sm_io->status.plant_sync, &sync_first, &sync_time); Plant_Run (); ns_common::TimeProfile_Execution (&sm_io->status.plant_sync, &sync_first, &sync_time); } } And then main process counts down a multiplier to increase it's run rate. In this case 10000X boost::interprocess::scoped_lock<boost::interprocess::interprocess_mutex> plant_lock(plant_sync.mutex); boost::interprocess::scoped_lock<boost::interprocess::interprocess_mutex> control_lock(control_sync.mutex); mult = 10000; if(mult > 1) { iterations = 0; while(mult-- > 0) { plant_sync.cond_timestep.notify_one(); control_sync.cond_timestep.notify_one(); plant_sync.cond_running.wait(plant_lock); control_sync.cond_running.wait(control_lock); iterations++; } } Works great under XP, our new Windows 7 desktops it are dog slow by a factor of around 50. Any ideas why this would be? Thanks! Jeffrey Noll Software Engineer (860)654-6378 CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING: This email may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the inteded recipients. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this communication is prohibited. If you believe that you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system.

5 5

Re: [boost] boost 153 interprocess_mutex much slower in windows 7 than xp?
by jim＠jc-bell.com 07 Oct '13

07 Oct '13

> We have 3 processes that are synchronized with an interprocess mutex. > Basically one of them has a multiplier which allows the others to run at a > synchronized accelerated rate. Under XP we typically can get it to run at > 5000 times realtime. New desktop refreshes are coming out running Windows > 7 and the same code with faster machines with more memory are maxing out > at 250 times with 95%+ cpu idle time. > > Am new to boost so am wondering if we're doing something wrong. Here's the > crux of the code. 3 processes and some shared memory. > ... It might be hitting the disk when it shouldn't be. Try pointing SysInternals' ProcMon at each and see if one's doing file accesses where the other isn't. (SysInternals.com.)

1 0

[interest] rich-typed smart pointers
by Julian Gonggrijp 07 Oct '13

07 Oct '13

Dear Boost members, I have designed a smart pointer that relies on the type system to offer safe and flexible automatic memory management at no runtime cost. It combines single ownership as in std::unique_ptr and reliable access from multiple places as in std::shared_ptr with some additional features. I believe it to be about as safe and practically useful as a smart pointer in C++11 could get. Further explanation and a proof-of-concept implementation is available over here: https://github.com/jgonggrijp/rich-typed-pointers There is no license yet, but you have my explicit permission to try the library and the example programs at your own risk. :-) Could this library be useful addition to Boost? I look forward to your comments. Thanks in advance, -Julian PS: a possible minor seed for discussion is the current lack of an implicit cast to bool. I agree with Jeff Flinn's argument why the implicit cast may be desirable [1]. However, it interferes with the comparison operators when one of the operands should be implicitly cast to weak_ptr, as explained in [2]. I could repeat myself and write comparison functions for all possible overloads, but this seems inelegant. [1] http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Looking-for-thoughts-on-a-new-smart-poin… [2] https://github.com/jgonggrijp/rich-typed-pointers/commit/89fcf2821cb39bbb9f…

5 24

[utility][enable_if]Fiddly function lookup failure on msvc11
by 山本賢一 07 Oct '13

07 Oct '13

Hi, I found a part of my code failed to compile with boost::enable_if_c when I was porting my code for msvc11 (Visual Studio 2012). The original code was bit too complex but I simplified it to boil down the issue. The simplified code is eventually like this: #include <boost/mpl/bool.hpp> #include <boost/mpl/not.hpp> #include <boost/utility/enable_if.hpp> template <class T> struct always_true : boost::mpl::true_ { }; template <class T> inline typename boost::enable_if_c< !boost::mpl::not_< always_true<T> // Argument of boost::mpl::not_ >::type::value // Refer the result of boost::mpl::not_ , int >::type get_one(T) { return 1; } void test() { get_one('a'); // Compile fails at this line with error C2893 } msvc11 fails to resolve the call to get_one() but I believe the code is definitely correct. With some more extra test, I found: (1)The same code compiles on msvc10 (Visual Studio 2010) and msvc9 (Visual Studio 2008). (2)If I changed the line I commented "//Argument of boost::mpl::not_" to "boost::mpl::true_", the code compiled on msvc11. template <class T> inline typename boost::enable_if_c< !boost::mpl::not_< boost::mpl::true_ // *** Argument of boost::mpl::not_ >::type::value // Refer the result of boost::mpl::not_ , int >::type get_one(T) { return 1; } (3)If changed the line I commented "// Refer the result of boost::mpl::not_" to ">::value", the code compiled on msvc11. template <class T> inline typename boost::enable_if_c< !boost::mpl::not_< always_true<T> // Argument of boost::mpl::not_ >::value // *** Refer the result of boost::mpl::not_ , int >::type get_one(T) { return 1; } The issue seems to be rather a compiler quirk of msvc11 than a enable_if's problem, but I posted the issue here because we need a workaround to avoid it (on msvc11) when we use enable_if. Please let me know if you have any idea about the issue. Thanks. Yamamoto

3 3

[algorithm] documentation mistakes in 'equal' and 'mismatch'
by Takatoshi Kondo 06 Oct '13

06 Oct '13

Hi, Marshall IIUC, I found some mistakes in the documentation of 'equal' and 'mismatch'. http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_54_0/libs/algorithm/doc/html/algorithm/CXX1… http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_54_0/libs/algorithm/doc/html/the_boost_algo… In the first code block, auto seq1 = { 0, 1, 2 }; auto seq2 = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 }; std::equal ( seq1.begin (), seq1.end (), seq2.begin ()); // true std::equal ( seq2.begin (), seq2.end (), seq1.begin ()); // Undefined behavior std::equal ( seq1.begin (), seq1.end (), seq1.begin (), seq2.end ()); // false The second seq1.begin() in the last line should be seq2.begin() as follows. std::equal ( seq1.begin (), seq1.end (), seq2.begin (), seq2.end ()); // false Similarly, std::mismatch ( seq1.begin (), seq1.end (), seq1.begin (), seq2.end ()); // <3, 3> should be std::mismatch ( seq1.begin (), seq1.end (), seq2.begin (), seq2.end ()); // <3, 3> Thanks, Takatoshi

2 1

[svn] Server problems?
by Rene Rivera 06 Oct '13

06 Oct '13

I'm getting a persistent error on te SVN server like so: === Froggy:trunk grafik$ svn up Updating '.': svn: E175002: Server sent unexpected return value (413 Request Entity Too Large) in response to REPORT request for '/svn/boost/!svn/vcc/default' === Any ideas? Rene -- -- -- 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

2 1

[circular-buffer] Missing images.
by Daniel James 06 Oct '13

06 Oct '13

Hi, I made a change to try to fix some broken links in the circular buffer documentation: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/86174/ You can see the broken links in the inspect report: http://boost.cowic.de/rc/docs-inspect-trunk.html#doc Although hopefully in a couple of hours they'll be gone. But there are still a couple of links to images which I can't find: 'circular_buffer.png' and 'space_optimized.png', did someone forget to check them in? It's probably best not to check them in at 'libs/circular_buffer/doc/html/images', but instead at something like 'libs/circular_buffer/doc/images', that way the images are kept separate from generated documentation. I'll help get the image links right, as it's more tricky than it should be. thanks, Daniel

1 0