- Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] [scope] Proposing Boost.Scope
by Andrzej Krzemienski 14 Apr '23

14 Apr '23

czw., 13 kwi 2023 o 10:43 Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> napisał(a): > On 4/13/23 06:08, Darrell Wright via Boost wrote: > > One thing I learned in my own replacement is that exit_success is > heavily penalized on MSVC, even when there is no possible exception, > because of the call to uncaught_exceptions that isn’t optimized. It’s a > good thing to document, if not already, as it is surprising. > > Well, a certain amount of overhead is expected, since the added > condition is there and not likely to be optimized away. However, I would > expect uncaught_exceptions() to be cheap, as it should simply read an > integer from TLS. It looks like the call to std::uncaught_exceptions() is not optimized out, even in -O3: https://godbolt.org/z/PYEjP5PYY > I wonder how std::uncaught_exceptions() compares to > our custom implementation in boost::core::uncaught_exceptions(). > Perhaps, I should benchmark it. > > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost >

1 0

Master branch is NOT yet open
by Marshall Clow 14 Apr '23

14 Apr '23

I have some more work to do to start the 1.83.0 release cycle. I will post here when the master branch is open (sometime tomorrow) Thank you for your patience. — Marshall

1 0

[release] Boost 1.82.0
by Marshall Clow 14 Apr '23

14 Apr '23

Release 1.82.0 of the Boost C++ Libraries is now available. These open-source libraries work well with the C++ Standard Library, and are usable across a broad spectrum of applications. The Boost license encourages both commercial and non-commercial use. This release contain numerous enhancements and bug fixes for existing libraries. For details, including download links, see <http://www.boost.org/users/news/version_1.82.0> You can also download directly from: <https://boostorg.jfrog.io/artifactory/main/release/1.82.0/> To install this release on your system, see <http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/more/getting_started/index.html> Thanks to everyone who participated in this release. -- The Boost Release Team Marshall Clow, Glen Fernandes

1 0

Re: [boost] Reducing dependency on Boost.Regex
by Andrey Semashev 13 Apr '23

13 Apr '23

On 4/13/23 06:07, Francois Kritzinger via Boost wrote: > On 2023/03/13 14:07, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote: >> On 3/13/23 15:00, Boris Kolpackov via Boost wrote: >>> A quick note on our experience reducing dependency on Boost.Regex >>> (and thus ICU) in build2 packages for Boost 1.81.0. Now only the >>> following (leaf) libraries unconditionally depend on Boost.Regex: >>> >>> * Boost.Convert >>> * Boost.DLL >>> * Boost.Log >> >> Boost.Log can be configured to use std::regex or Boost.Xpressive as an >> alternative to Boost.Regex. > > However Boost.Log also depends on Boost.Spirit which depends on > Boost.Regex so that's a hard dependency. To my knowledge, Boost.Log doesn't use the bits of Boost.Spirit that use Boost.Regex. This means, if you build Boost.Log that uses e.g. std::regex internally, it will not link with Boost.Regex.

1 0

Re: [boost] [scope] Proposing Boost.Scope
by Andrey Semashev 13 Apr '23

13 Apr '23

On 4/13/23 06:08, Darrell Wright via Boost wrote: > One thing I learned in my own replacement is that exit_success is heavily penalized on MSVC, even when there is no possible exception, because of the call to uncaught_exceptions that isn’t optimized. It’s a good thing to document, if not already, as it is surprising. Well, a certain amount of overhead is expected, since the added condition is there and not likely to be optimized away. However, I would expect uncaught_exceptions() to be cheap, as it should simply read an integer from TLS. I wonder how std::uncaught_exceptions() compares to our custom implementation in boost::core::uncaught_exceptions(). Perhaps, I should benchmark it.

1 0

Re: [boost] Boost configuration problem
by Peter Dimov 13 Apr '23

13 Apr '23

Дмитрий Архипов wrote: > How did you install Boost? This > > boost_filesystem.lib (shared, Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS=ON) > > Seems like you're trying to use a static library, but only a shared library was > installed. https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/boost-cpp would be my guess. > чт, 13 апр. 2023 г., 06:17 Raivo Rebane via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org>: ...

1 0

Re: [boost] Boost configuration problem
by Дмитрий Архипов 13 Apr '23

13 Apr '23

How did you install Boost? This > boost_filesystem.lib (shared, Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS=ON) Seems like you're trying to use a static library, but only a shared library was installed. чт, 13 апр. 2023 г., 06:17 Raivo Rebane via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org>: > Hello, > > May be I am in wrong list, but I didnt get answer for week from bugs list. > > May be anybody can help me ? > > I got following error from boost configuration and I can't go forward > > CMake gives configuration errors : > > CMake Error at > C:/Users/Raivo/miniconda3/Library/lib/cmake/Boost-1.78.0/BoostConfig.cmake:141 > > (find_package): > Found package configuration file: > > C:/Users/Raivo/miniconda3/Library/lib/cmake/boost_filesystem-1.78.0/boost_filesystem-config.cmake > > > > but it set boost_filesystem_FOUND to FALSE so package > "boost_filesystem" is > considered to be NOT FOUND. Reason given by package: > > No suitable build variant has been found. > > The following variants have been tried and rejected: > > * boost_filesystem.lib (shared, Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS=ON) > > Still Boost is useless for me as I wanted to build Point CLoud Lib, bud > CMake stops on these errors. > > How to overcome of this error or what I have to do to go forwwsrd ? > > Regards > Raivo > > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost >

1 0

Re: [boost] Boost configuration problem
by Peter Dimov 13 Apr '23

13 Apr '23

Raivo Rebane wrote: > Hello, > > May be I am in wrong list, but I didnt get answer for week from bugs list. > > May be anybody can help me ? > > I got following error from boost configuration and I can't go forward > > CMake gives configuration errors : > > CMake Error at > C:/Users/Raivo/miniconda3/Library/lib/cmake/Boost- > 1.78.0/BoostConfig.cmake:141 > (find_package): > Found package configuration file: > > C:/Users/Raivo/miniconda3/Library/lib/cmake/boost_filesystem- > 1.78.0/boost_filesystem-config.cmake > > > but it set boost_filesystem_FOUND to FALSE so package "boost_filesystem" > is > considered to be NOT FOUND. Reason given by package: > > No suitable build variant has been found. > > The following variants have been tried and rejected: > > * boost_filesystem.lib (shared, Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS=ON) The error is exactly as it says. The Boost package that you're using only has shared libraries (e.g. bin/boost_filesystem.dll and its corresponding import library lib/boost_filesystem.lib), but the CMake variable Boost_USE_STATIC_LIBS is set to ON, requesting static libraries (such as lib/libboost_filesystem.lib, which you don't have.)

1 0

[release] Boost 1.82.0 Release Candidate 2 is available
by Löw, Tobias (Iqony Solutions GmbH) 13 Apr '23

13 Apr '23

Compiling the range mfc-iterators with msvc 143 (VS2022) results in a compilation error. It would be nice, if https://github.com/boostorg/range/pull/144 was addressed before the final release. Compilation error with msvc 143, std=c++latest: 1>D:\boost\range\detail\microsoft.hpp(626,33): error C2440: 'return': cannot convert from 'const void *' to 'const void *&' 1>D:\boost\range\detail\microsoft.hpp(624,1): message : while compiling class template member function 'const void *&boost::range_detail_microsoft::list_iterator<const X,const void *,boost::use_default,boost::use_default>::dereference(void) const' 1> with 1> [ 1> X=CPtrList 1> ] 1>D:\boost\iterator\iterator_facade.hpp(631,11): message : see reference to function template instantiation 'const void *&boost::range_detail_microsoft::list_iterator<const X,const void *,boost::use_default,boost::use_default>::dereference(void) const' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> X=CPtrList 1> ] 1>D:\boost\range\mfc.hpp(881,1): message : see reference to class template instantiation 'boost::range_detail_microsoft::list_iterator<const X,const void *,boost::use_default,boost::use_default>' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> X=CPtrList 1> ] Thanks Tobias

1 0

Re: [boost] quadmath as distinct library?
by Christopher Kormanyos 12 Apr '23

12 Apr '23

>>>> * problem description >>>> In boost::math::cstdfloat AND boost::multiprecision::float128>>>> identical functions for __float128 (quadmath) are provided. >>>> >>>> This is unnecessary overhead. I think it would make sense>>>> to "pull out" the quadmath library as a distinct library > Chris Kormanyos and I have discussed writing a software> implementation of binary128 that could be used cross> platform. That would be more valuable as a separate library. It is good to read this discussion. Historically, it all went like this... When we started <boost/cstdfloat.hpp>, we wereinterested in specifying floating-point types havingfixed-widths. This proposal was abandoned in the2013 timeframe, but recently picked up and broughtinto C++23 with some new stuff. Around that time, we also "invented" Multiprecision,which came into Boost 1.53, basically with the numberbackend and cpp_dec_float only. We went on(with lots and lots of work primiarly by John) toadd several backends to Multiprecision, one ofthem being Multiprecision's float128 backend. So indeed, we have two 128 bit floats hangingaround, yet form some platforms such as thepopular MSVC, we have zero 128-bit floatimplementations. Writing a uniform, cross-platform implementationcombined with aliases and/or seamless use inMultiprecision is, I believe, something of interestto us all. But i believe we need some specifyingwork and a few trial implementations in order tosee how all of this should fit in together nicelain a post C++23 domain. This is good discussion and I think we will followup on it. Chris On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 01:12:01 PM GMT+2, Matt Borland via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > On Apr 11, 2023, at 8:09 PM, Gero Peterhoff via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > Am 13.03.23 um 13:33 schrieb John Maddock via Boost: > >> On 13/03/2023 02:43, Gero Peterhoff via Boost wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> * problem description >>> In boost::math::cstdfloat AND boost::multiprecision::float128 identical functions for __float128 (quadmath) are provided. >>> >>> This is unnecessary overhead. I think it would make sense to "pull out" the quadmath library as a distinct library. I did this once canonically, but it doesn't work yet because boost::math::cstdfloat/boost::multiprecision::float128 have to be adapted for this. This is a prototype where there is still a lot of work to be done. But the beginning is done. >> >> If you mean https://github.com/boostorg/multiprecision/blob/develop/include/boost/multi… then it's a trivially small header, and spinning stuff out into a separate library has a significant maintenance overhead. > > I mean this canonically. > Advantages: > - For both compilers (gcc/intel) the functions/limits can be provided directly, without the mass #define/#undef function-macros. > - Clean separation and/or Konsolidierugn of the __float128 types: > a) gcc: __float128 GCC also provides support for __ibm128 on PowerPC platforms. We don’t have any support for it because there has been no demand signal. > b) intel: Windows _Qaud -> __float128, !Windows -> __float128 (https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-C-Compiler/C-Compiler-128-bit-floating…) > So there is only one type __float128. > - Clean/mature standard functions can be provided for IO. > Disadvantages: > - One-time(!) effort to update dependent libs. Boost.Multiprecision is already available without the rest of Boost: https://github.com/boostorg/multiprecision/releases so there isn’t much bloat in the way it can be consumed now. Chris Kormanyos and I have discussed writing a software implementation of binary128 that could be used cross platform. That would be more valuable as a separate library. Matt _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

1 0