- Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] [Boost-commit] svn:boost r79779 - trunk/tools/build/v2/engine
by Steven Watanabe 01 Aug '12

01 Aug '12

AMDG On 07/28/2012 02:04 AM, jurko.gospodnetic(a)docte.hr wrote: > Author: jurko > Date: 2012-07-28 05:04:41 EDT (Sat, 28 Jul 2012) > New Revision: 79779 > URL: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/79779 > > Log: > Boost Jam version information output cleaned up a bit to make it easier to update it with additional information. /Really/? If you want some kind of key/value feature testing, it doesn't belong under the regular version flag. Please revert this. I just find it ugly. > Text files modified: > trunk/tools/build/v2/engine/jam.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > Modified: trunk/tools/build/v2/engine/jam.c > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/tools/build/v2/engine/jam.c (original) > +++ trunk/tools/build/v2/engine/jam.c 2012-07-28 05:04:41 EDT (Sat, 28 Jul 2012) > @@ -263,6 +263,8 @@ > { > printf( "Boost.Jam " ); > printf( "Version %s. %s.\n", VERSION, OSMINOR ); > + printf( "\n" ); > + printf( "Copyright information:\n" ); > printf( " Copyright 1993-2002 Christopher Seiwald and Perforce " > "Software, Inc.\n" ); > printf( " Copyright 2001 David Turner.\n" ); > In Christ, Steven Watanabe

1 0

[type_erasure] Review ends today July 27, 2012
by Lorenzo Caminiti 01 Aug '12

01 Aug '12

Hello all, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> *** The review of Steven Watanabe's proposed Boost.TypeErasure library >> begins on July 18, 2012 and ends on July 27, 2012. *** > > *** Boost.TypeErasure review ends in 5 days. Please submit your reviews :D *** *** Boost.TypeErasure review ends today July 27, 2012. If you are planning to submit a review, please do so as soon as possible. *** Thank you to everyone who has commented on the library and submitted a review so far! The review manager, --Lorenzo P.S. I am considering extending the review until end of day Sunday July 29, 2012... I will keep you posted. > There have been interesting discussions on the library on the ML but I > have not received any official review yet :( Especially if you are a > user of Boost Any, Function, and Any Iterator, you definitely want to > take a look at Type Erasure as it generalizes solutions provided by > those other libraries. > > Thank you. > > The review manager. > --Lorenzo > >> THE LIBRARY >> >> C++ provides runtime polymorphism through virtual functions. They are >> a very useful feature, but they do have some limitations. >> * They are intrusive. In generic programming, we can design an >> interface which allows third-party types to be adapted to it. >> * They require dynamic memory management. Of course, most of the >> problems can be avoided by using an appropriate smart pointer type. >> Even so, it still acts like a pointer rather than a value. >> * Virtual functions' ability to apply multiple independent concepts to >> a single object is limited. >> The Boost.TypeErasure library solves these problems allowing us to >> mirror static generic programming at runtime. >> >> Library source: >> http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/type_erasure/ >> >> Pre-built documentation: >> http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/ >> >> You can also download archives with pre-built documentation from: >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/steven-watanabe.u/files/ >> >> YOUR REVIEW >> >> Please submit a review to the mailing-list by replying to this email >> ("[boost] [type_erasure] Review ..." should be in the subject). >> >> Please state clearly whether you think this library should be accepted >> as a Boost library. >> >> Other questions you may want to consider: >> 1. What is your evaluation of the design? >> 2. What is your evaluation of the implementation? >> 3. What is your evaluation of the documentation? >> 4. What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? >> 5. Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have >> any problems? >> 6. How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A >> quick reading? In-depth study? >> 7. Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain? >> >> Thanks in advance to all who participate in the review discussion -- >> I'm looking forward to it!

6 7

interest in generic cyclic visitor
by Jan Herrmann 01 Aug '12

01 Aug '12

Hello, I have an implementation of generic cyclic visitor. It is available at https://github.com/janherrmann/visitor . With my implementation it is possible to create non-member, non-friend templates which behave like virtual functions. Additionally it can be used as a base for multimethod implementation. Moreover it can be used to build a extensible type information system. All test cases compile with msvc-10.0 and gcc-mingw-4.6.2. Is there need for such a library? Jan Herrmann

1 0

Review Request: Endian
by David Stone 01 Aug '12

01 Aug '12

A few months back I posted a proposal for an endian conversion library: http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2012/04/191931.php I believe my library is now in a finished state, and I would like to have it considered for inclusion into Boost. A zip file containing everything can be found here: https://bitbucket.org/davidstone/endian/get/tip.zip or you can just browse the repository here: https://bitbucket.org/davidstone/endian/ The only file that users need to be concerned with is endian.hpp. endian.cpp contains performance + correctness tests, and example.cpp is a very short example program on how to use the library that opens up a file, reads in a number that was written in big-endian format, and prints it to the user's screen in host format. There is no special compiling / linking instructions (people who wish to test the program can simply compile endian.cpp). Included is a SCons script that allows easy compilation with gcc or clang with many warnings + optimizations turned on. My programs all compile cleanly at very high warning levels in these compilers because I know many users compile their own projects at such a setting, and I don't want a library file causing noise. I included the documentation in index.html, but I'm not quite sure on how to correctly format things.

3 2

My take on an allocate_shared_array and make_shared_array implementation
by Glen Fernandes 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

Hi all, I've desired an allocate_shared_array for a while (and, looking at some existing threads about the topic, it seems others have also). Recently, while working with a code base that accepted both shared_ptr<T> and shared_array<T> for a sequence of T elements, I decided to write both (for shared_ptr<T> since shared_array<T> does not support allocators). The code for both my make_array<T> and allocate_array<T> initial implementation can be found at: https://github.com/glenfe/glenfern/tree/master/glenfern I was wondering if there is any desire for these (after necessary tweaking, refinement, and testing) to become part of Boost. I'm not certain how useful they are in their current form for people using shared_array<T> that can't switch to shared_ptr<T>. Is there any desire to update shared_array<T> so that it supports custom allocators? In that event, my implementation can then easily be applied to shared_array<T> as well. Alternatively, are there any plans to provide a separate smart pointer type for an array with allocator support? Cheers, Glen

1 0

[block_ptr] Update
by Phil Bouchard 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

Hi, It's been more than a year since a completed the block_ptr and it seems as if more recent library are being reviewed first. This would suggest the FIFO of the schedule is not followed. I was just wondering since at the same time the reviewing of block_ptr is cost / beneficial. Regards, -Phil Author of: http://www.fornux.com/ http://www.finitetheory.com/

4 7

Fwd: deep-thought reboot
by DongInn Kim 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

Dear all, Can we reboot our NFS server sometime tomorrow? If nobody objects this reboot, I will go ahead to reboot deep-thought at 9am (E.T.) on July 31st, 2012. Date: Tuesday, July 31 2012 Time: - 6:00am-6:10am Pacific US time - 7:00am-7:10am Mountain US time - 8:00am-8:10am Central US time - 9:00am-9:10am Eastern US time - 1:00pm-1:10pm GMT The following services would not be available during the reboot. - NFS $HOME - web sites (e.g., www.open-mpi.org, svn.mpi-forum.org, www.osl.iu.edu/publications, ...) Please let me know if you have any issues or question about the outage. Regards, -- - DongInn --------------------------- CREST System administrator dikim(a)cs.indiana.edu Indiana University Bloomington, IN Begin forwarded message: > From: Rob Henderson <robh(a)indiana.edu> > Subject: deep-thought reboot > Date: July 30, 2012 8:36:41 AM EDT > To: DongInn Kim <dikim(a)osl.iu.edu> > > DongInn, we need to reboot deep-thought in order to get updated raid controller firmware in place and boot to the new kernel. This should be very quick with only a few minutes of downtime. Would there be a good time for us to do this? > > Thanks, > > --Rob

1 1

[type_erasure] Performance
by Julien Nitard 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

Hi all, I took time to write a simple benchmark for boost::any. Please find the code attached. It requires C++11. I could only test with g++ because clang 3.0/Ubuntu segfaults on the code. I'd be more than happy to get feedback on whether the tests are relevant. I think the compiler can't impact the result by optimizing away the payloads because there's the virtual call barrier preventing it from doing so. The results are quite good for a library that is not optimized yet. Here are some typical results on my machine (though results may vary slightly on each run): Times are in seconds for 100 million iterations, using -O3 -std=c++0x and no other special flags. * Classic inheritance replacement: Inherited: 0.261134 Erased: 0.260092 Erased + ctor: 0.343596 Erased + ctor 3 concepts: 0.295584 * boost::function replacement: boost::bind: 0.260356 boost::function: 0.469181 std::function: 0.515477 te::any + boost::bind: 0.494241 te::any + lambda: 0.379945 Basically that means that TypeErasure has a cost that's zero or at worse neglectible when compared to normal inheritance. It probably means that those simple use cases can't be optimized since the theoretical performance is achieved. If you create the any object each time, then there's something like a 30% loss. That's against an empty virtual function which means that for non trivial payloads the cost is still low. Good job ! The only thing I can't explain is why creating an any with 3 concepts in an mpl::vector is faster than a single primitive concepts. Any ideas ? Nice as well is that callable<> matches or bests boost::function in the simple cases I have tested (likely to be common thanks to C++ lambdas). Actually, I guess that the results would be even better in "normal" circumstances because the way I wrote the test any has 2 virtual call to perform. I guess that in that case again, optimization is not required before acceptance and release. Regards, Julien

1 0

[multiprecision] Huge testcase datafile in commit r79802
by Lars Viklund 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

Hi list. My boost-commit@ mbox made my mail agent go into a nice crawl today when displaying the commit details for r79802. It turns out that it's about 6.3 MiB large, most of which is a massive 100k line test case in sandbox/big_number/libs/multiprecision/performance/delaunay_data.txt Will this behemoth file end up in the real repository in case of library acceptance, and even worse, will it end up in the deployed tarballs? Are there any guidelines on keeping tests neat, or possibly generating performance test data if it's excessively huge? While in the discussion, has there been any thoughts of separating documentation from the tree, and/or having codegen of the source files that are clearly generated (vector200.hpp, etc.) in the build tree? It's very straining on disk space to have multiple Boost trees lying around, particularly if you're working in some kind of homedir environment. Combating-bloat'ly-yours, -- Lars Viklund | zao(a)acc.umu.se

2 2

[type_erasure]suggest tuple doc contain requires clause specifying T... are unique
by Larry Evans 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure… Specifies that the T... are placeholders; however, it doesn't specify that they be unique; hence, tuple<concept,_a,_a> x(int(0),std::vector<int>(0)); would satisfy the current description but wouldn't be right. Of course no one would intentionally do that; however, if the Tags are calculated in some meta-program, it might happened accidentally. Hence the requires class should also say, "If T... are not unique, no diagnostic occurs", or something similar. The reason I think "no diagnostic occurs" is that I've looked briefly in tuple.hpp, at the: ::boost::type_erasure::cons<Concept, T...> impl; in the class tuple definition and the cons definition, and I don't see any check for duplicates. -regards, Larry

2 3