- Boost - lists.boost.org

[1.54] [thread] MSVC build broken
by Andrey Semashev 16 Jun '13

16 Jun '13

Hi, I've noticed that my Boost.Log tests on MSVC are failing massively. The build log hints that Boost.Thread might be the culprit, and its tests are also failing on MSVC with the following error: ..\boost/thread/future.hpp(1127) : error C2248: 'boost::unique_lock<Mutex>::operator =' : cannot access private member declared in class 'boost::unique_lock<Mutex>' with [ Mutex=boost::mutex ] ..\boost/thread/lock_types.hpp(110) : see declaration of 'boost::unique_lock<Mutex>::operator =' with [ Mutex=boost::mutex ] This is happening on release branch. Could this be fixed?

4 10

[test] resolution of test time information
by Alexander Kjäll 16 Jun '13

16 Jun '13

Hi I'm new to the boost test library and it seems to fill my needs of a testing framework quite well. One thing that i haven't managed to figure out is if it's possible to increase the resolution of the timekeeping information, it currently seems to be reported with a resolution of 10 milliseconds. Is it possible to reduce that somehow? best regards Alexander Kjäll

1 0

[c++11]
by Sid Sacek 15 Jun '13

15 Jun '13

This was probably discussed many times already, but I seem to not have been paying close enough attention. Maybe someone can point me to the discussions in the archives... With all of the cool new language features of C++11, am I correct in assuming that boost library developers have no real opportunity to use any of it in order to be backwards compliant with all the older standard? I realize there are many boost equivalents already in place, but when would it become permissible to use native C++11 syntax? Thanks, -Sid

7 8

[optional][thread] Returning a future in an optional fails
by Klaim - Joël Lamotte 14 Jun '13

14 Jun '13

I just hit this using VS2012/boost 1.54 beta. #include <boost/optional.hpp> #include <future> boost::optional< std::future<void> > top() { return std::async( []{ int i=0; ++i; } ); } int main() { auto opt = top(); } Error: 1>E:\Projects\SDK\boost\boost\include\boost-1_54\boost/optional/optional.hpp(347): error C2248: 'std::future<void>::future' : cannot access private member declared in class 'std::future<void>' 1> C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\include\future(1238) : see declaration of 'std::future<void>::future' 1> C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\include\future(1200) : see declaration of 'std::future<void>' 1> E:\Projects\SDK\boost\boost\include\boost-1_54\boost/optional/optional.hpp(346) : while compiling class template member function 'void boost::optional_detail::optional_base<T>::construct(const std::future<void> &)' 1> with 1> [ 1> T=std::future<void> 1> ] 1> E:\Projects\SDK\boost\boost\include\boost-1_54\boost/optional/optional.hpp(231) : see reference to function template instantiation 'void boost::optional_detail::optional_base<T>::construct(const std::future<void> &)' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> T=std::future<void> 1> ] 1> E:\Projects\SDK\boost\boost\include\boost-1_54\boost/optional/optional.hpp(501) : see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::optional_detail::optional_base<T>' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> T=std::future<void> 1> ] 1> E:\Projects\Art_Of_Sequence\repos\aos-all\tool\aosdesigner\backend\test\workspace.cpp(30) : see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::optional<T>' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> T=std::future<void> 1> ] I also tried with http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/ gcc4.8 (but I don't know the boost version) and got a similar error. I first hit this with boost::future but it don't seem to be the problem as it generate the same error. My question is: does std/boost::future don't match the requirements to be an optional value? Or is this an error I should log? Joel Lamotte

2 1

link to old TR1 draft on boost.org
by Jonathan Wakely 14 Jun '13

14 Jun '13

The Boost home page links to http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1745.pdf but that draft was replaced by N1836.

2 1

Future of Boost.Signals
by Marshall Clow 13 Jun '13

13 Jun '13

Doug Gregor has indicated to me that he is not able to continue with the development/maintenance of Boost.Signals. [ This is not a surprise, the last significant change to the library was back in 2004. ] Fortunately, Frank Hess' Signals2 library is going strong, and he has a porting guide for people currently using Boost.Signals at: http://www.boost.org/doc/html/signals2/api_changes.html#signals2.porting For the upcoming 1.54 release, I have added notes to this effect to the Boost.Signals documentation, and added a warning to <boost/signals.hpp>. The warning states: Boost.Signals is no longer being maintained and is now deprecated. Please switch to Boost.Signals2. To disable this warning message, define BOOST_SIGNALS_NO_DEPRECATION_WARNING Note: There have been no code changes to Boost.Signals. All code that uses it will continue to work. -- Marshall Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:mclow.lists@gmail.com> A.D. 1517: Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the church door and is promptly moderated down to (-1, Flamebait). -- Yu Suzuki

1 0

Tips to fix boost::asio::windows::random_access_handle which is seriously broken
by Niall Douglas 13 Jun '13

13 Jun '13

Dear Boost, The forthcoming GSoC Boost.AFIO library has found a problem with boost::asio::windows::random_access_handle in that it appears to clamp buffer sizes to 64Kb and not increment overlapped offsets during multi-buffer reads and writes, and which is reported at https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/8669. These are desirable features for network i/o, not so for file i/o. As my work on the existing code base which Paul is porting to Boost is now complete and purring beautifully on POSIX, I'm thinking I might as well go fix the Boost.ASIO Windows IOCP problem. Before I begin, can I ask here if anyone else has done some work on this topic from which I might be able to borrow? The thread at http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.asio.user/3676 suggests that if I use async_write_some() then I can bypass the 64Kb clamp using "my own completion condition". I'm thinking that boost::asio::windows::random_access_handle really ought to actually implement random access, so rather than hacking around the problem, fixing boost::asio::windows::random_access_handle is better. My thanks in advance, Niall --- Opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of BlackBerry Inc.

1 0

[Multiprecision] High-performance radix-2 floating-point back-end
by Aditya Jain 13 Jun '13

13 Jun '13

Hi This is my first post on the mailing list , so apologies if it doesn't follow any of the protocols. I was looking at GSoC projects this year for Boost and I am wondering if someone is working on a high-performance radix-2 floating-point back-end for Boost.Multiprecision. If not , I would be interested in doing this project .I am currently a Masters student interning at a tech company in Seattle but I would be able to devote 15-20 hours a week for this project. I have a fairly good background in C++ and numerical programming.So in case no else is working on it (for GSoC or otherwise ) , I would be really interested . If someone is already working on it, I would be interested in some other projects I could potentially work on . Looking forward to a reply. Regards -- Aditya Jain MS Computer Science (Machine Learning Track) Columbia University B.Tech, IIT Roorkee

4 4

ATTN: Boost GSoC mentors and students: Continuous Integration for GSoC thoughts
by Niall Douglas 11 Jun '13

11 Jun '13

Dear Boost, I spent the weekend experimenting with getting CI set up for the async file i/o library which will hopefully become Boost.AFIO through Paul's GSoC. I tried a number of free-for-open-source CI providers which integrate tightly with GitHub, and eventually settled with Travis CI. You can see the last commit CI results at https://travis-ci.org/ned14/TripleGit. As much as Travis CI has a primitive and clunky UI, unlike the other CIs it's based on snapshotting VMs with root privs which gives you unparalleled flexibility for testing config, so I was able to configure this to happen with each and every git push to github: 1. Test that code builds with GCC 4.6 and clang 3.2. 2. Test that unit and functional tests execute without error when built with GCC 4.6 and clang 3.2. 3. Run unit and functional tests with valgrind --tool=memcheck and test that no memory errors nor memory leaks occur with binaries built with GCC 4.6 and clang 3.2. 4. Install GCC 4.8 and compile everything using -fsanitize=thread (i.e. instrument using the port of clang's ThreadSanitizer v2 to GCC), then execute a full set of unit and functional tests looking for race conditions and if any, fail. You'll note I've marked that test as allowed to fail, because Boost v1.53 has a number of known race conditions when used as C++11 which are hopefully fixed in v1.54 :) Personally speaking, I think this depth and degree of CI is *invaluable* to modern software development practice. So the question becomes: are the Boost GSoC mentors and students interested in setting up CI for this year's GSoC projects, or at least the ones hosted on github at https://github.com/BoostGSOC? In case you're wondering how hard it is to set up Travis CI for your github project, you just need one file called .travis.yml. You can see the one I wrote at https://github.com/ned14/TripleGit/blob/master/.travis.yml. Thoughts? Niall --- Opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of BlackBerry Inc.

4 7

[utility] [assert] Proposal for a new assert macro which stores the failed values ("informative assert")
by Viktor Sehr 11 Jun '13

11 Jun '13

I'd like some opinions about this assert implementation which I'd like to propose as an update of the old BOOST_ASSERT. Basically it stores the failed values next to the expression string, instead of just the expression string: "INFORMATIVE_ASSERT(5*5 < 2*2);" "5*5 < 2*2 | 25 | 4" "INFORMATIVE_ASSERT(std::vector<int>(10).size() == std::vector<int>(12).size());" "std::vector<int>(10).size() > std::vector<int>(12).size() | 10 | 12" Notes - If the class can't be serialized, the byte-data is logged instead. - It writes the values to the expression string in order to be compliant with any assert implementations Easy to read implementation available here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B69BCPzak52DcnF5dmhRRno3V2M/edit?usp=sharing Modified version of BOOST_ASSERT available here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B69BCPzak52DZW1oX1AtREM4eVU/edit?usp=sharing /Viktor (Reposting this as I posted it without labels one week ago)

4 13