- Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] Comparison of serialization results
by Brian Wood 29 Dec '11

29 Dec '11

I found an error that affects two of my test cases -- not comparing apples to apples -- so have updated the page I linked to and the archive with the tests. Only one of the tests showed different results after the change. Rather than claiming the Boost Serialization version of the test was over 3 times slower than the Ebenezer version, I now claim it is over 2.3 times slower. Dave Abrahams: > A few: > > 1. The claim that you provide "full generation of marshalling functions" > is a little hard to swallow. In principle, it's impossible to know > based on a class declaration what to serialize, and how to serialize > it. True. In order to turn off the default generation of marshalling code, one can place a comment like this: // hand_written_marshalling_code in the body of a class. Instances of that class can still be marshalled if you provide the expected marshalling functions yourself. > 2. If you are going to compare yourself to Boost.Serialization, it would > be a good idea to replicate all of that library's tests with your own > system, to demonstrate that you cover the same expressive range. We don't cover the same range, but are working to add to the reperoire. We do have support for some things that the Boost library doesn't: iterator_range, sub_range, several Boost Intrusive containers, flex_string, segmented_array and a few others. To the best of my knowledge Boost Serialization doesn't take advantage of ::std::move. http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Serialization-and-std-move-td2598382.html I've checked the 1.48 code also. > It's usually very easy to build something that beats benchmarks of a > more-general system. Well, this is the first time I've had an archive with the tests that I link to, so at least think that is a step in the right direction. > 3. That "our approach writes marshalling functions based on the content > of the types involved" does not explain how you get past the private > member access barrier. The only legal technique I've seen for that > is at https://gist.github.com/1528856, and Boost.Serialization should > probably have support for that approach. C++ Middleware Writer users add function prototypes to their classes. The first two links on this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/rbtree_marshalling.html show an example. In that example the marshalling functions are virtual. In general they aren't required to be. Regards, Brian Wood Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net

2 1

Boost.Extension - any plans?
by Klaim - Joël Lamotte 29 Dec '11

29 Dec '11

Hi, I'd like to know if there are plans from it's author to submit Boost.Extension library for inclusion in boost? ( http://boost-extension.redshoelace.com/docs/boost/extension/index.html) Or any other plans? I remember the development was paused until some C++11 features would be available (I don't know which ones). But maybe I'm wrong. In my opinion, this library would be an excellent addition to boost. Joël Lamotte

1 1

Comparison of serialization results
by Brian Wood 29 Dec '11

29 Dec '11

I've recently updated a page -- http://webEbenezer.net/comparison.html comparing results obtained using Boost Serialization (1.48) and the C++ Middleware Writer (1.13) on both Linux and Windows7. There's an archive that has all the test files mentioned on that page here -- http://webEbenezer.net/comp/tests.tar.bz2 . In order to build the tests, you would need to build the Boost Serialization library and an Ebenezer library yourself. There's an archive on this page that has the Ebenezer library -- http://webEbenezer.net/build_integration.html . To summarize the results, the Boost versions range from 1.1 to 3 times slower than the Ebenezer versions. And the sizes of the Boost executables range from portly to obese compared to functionally equivalent Ebenezer executables. Comments on the how to improve the tests/process/etc. are welcome. Shalom Brian Wood Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net

4 6

Is there any interest in command line interpreter class templates?
by alexey.tsoy 29 Dec '11

29 Dec '11

Hello everybody, The file command_line.zip in the containers directory in Boost’s vault contain command line interpreter library. There you can find simple tutorial with examples and draft documentation. The library supports variable amount of option parameters as well as automatic type casting. Note that their types may be diferent. The library doesn't require special linking because it contains headers only. You only need to type in a few lines of code to start using it. Regards Alexey -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Is-there-any-interest-in-command-line-in… Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

4 6

Re: [boost] [Spirit-general] [karma][fusion] Signed integer members of Boost.Fusion adapted ADTs are not output correctly with Boost.Spirit.Karma rules
by Jeroen Habraken 29 Dec '11

29 Dec '11

Hi, On 27 December 2011 00:51, Torsten Maehne <Torsten.Maehne(a)gmx.de> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm using Boost.Spirit.Karma to format the output of some nested structs > (direct access of the public member variables) and abstract data types > (ADTs) (access to the private member variables via getters and setters) > in my code. I'm using Boost.Fusion to adapt the ADTs into a sequence of > values of primitive data types for output with Boost.Karma. This worked > fine till Boost 1.44. Since Boost 1.45 up till 1.48 and the current > Boost trunk (I tested svn revs 75505, 75963, and 76196) the output of unsigned > integer members of Boost.Fusion-adapted ADTs doesn't work anymore -- > even though I took into account the change in the name of macro from > BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_CLASS to BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_ADT as well as the > additionally required header > boost/spirit/include/support_adapt_adt_attributes.hpp. > > The problem is demonstrated in the attached test case for rational > number ADTs and structs, which use signed integer member > variables. Compilation of this test case against Boost 1.44.0 will > succeed and it will run without any errors. Compilation of this test > case against Boost 1.45.0 and 1.46.1 will fail. Compilation against > Boost 1.47.0 and 1.48.0 will succeed, but the output of negative values > of signed integer members of Boost.Fusion-adapted ADTs will be > wrong. The minus sign is output correctly, but it is followed by a wrong > value, which seems to be yielded by a cast from a signed to an unsigned > integer value instead of taking the absolute value of the signed integer > value. This has been observed on Mac OS X 10.7.2 (x86_64) with Xcode 4.2 > using Apple's g++ 4.2.1, Apple's clang++ 3.0. Interestingly, compiling > the test case against Boost 1.47.0 or Boost 1.48.0 using MacPorts g++ > 4.5.3, will yield more output checks to fail for Boost.Fusion-adapted > ADTs used in Karma output rules. > > Compilation against Boost from the Subversion trunk (I tested > revs. 75505, 75963, and 76196) does only succeed using Apple's clang++ > 3.0 and execution will yield the same wrong output for negative values > of signed integer members of Boost.Fusion-adapted ADTs. Compilation > fails with Apple's g++ 4.2.1 and MacPorts g++ 4.5.3. > > I'm not able to locate the root cause for this problem, whether it is in > Boost.Fusion or Boost.Spirit.Karma. I would appreciate any help to > resolve this annoying issue. Until a solution is found, I'm stuck with > Boost 1.44.0. Several things seem to play a role, but I've had a look at as to why the code doesn't compile using boost-trunk and found the cause to be an ambiguity: boost/typeof/native.hpp:30:9: error: reference to 'enable_if' is ambiguous boost/utility/enable_if.hpp:36:10: error: candidates are: template<class Cond, class T> struct boost::enable_if boost/test/tree/decorator.hpp:184:23: error: class boost::unit_test::decorator::enable_if As enable_if is often used without being fully qualified this breaks in a major fashion. Since boost/test/tree/decorator.hpp seems to be quite new (added 2011-10-02 11:00:16 +0200) it might be best fixed there. > Please note that I also submitted a bug report on this issue more than 6 > weeks ago without any reaction so far: > > <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6126> > > Best regards, > > Torsten Maehne Note: I've included boost(a)lists.boost.org in the discussion. Kind regards, Jeroen Habraken

2 6

Re: [boost] Proposal for a Differential Evolution C++ library
by Adrian Michel 26 Dec '11

26 Dec '11

Hi everybody, I released a new version of the DE library based on feedback I received on the initial release - see the doc at http://www.amichel.com/de/doc/html. First of all, I updated the documentation to describe in more detail what DE is, its use in one specific case, and links to descriptions of several other use cases - see the Overview page at the link above. I hope this will help make the case why a DE library would be worth being included in boost. BTW, there are already implementations in several languages and for several free or commercial products: Java, C, Matlab, Scilab, Fortran90, Python, Labview, Pascal, C#, etc. As far as the library itself, Thomas Heller noted that requiring the objective functions to be derived from the de::objective_function abstract class limited the user options by not allowing arbitrary unnamed or plain functions to be passed as objective functions. I followed his suggestion and reimplemented parts of the library as template classes, in particular the de::processor class. It is now possible to pass objective functions as: named functions, unnamed functions, functors (all with the right prototype) or objective function factories which create local copies of the objective function. All of these can be passed as either references, plain pointers or boost::shared_ptr. This change should make it easier to integrate the library within existing code. Your comments will be appreciated. Adrian

1 0

[string_algo] New Maintainer
by Pavol Droba 26 Dec '11

26 Dec '11

Dear Boosters, After a careful consideration I finally realized that I can no long act as a maintainer for String Algorithms Library. I simply don't have the required time and I thinks that the library deserves at least development. Therefore I would like to call for a volunteer(s) who would like to take String Algorithm library further. I will still be available for consultations or any such assistance if required. Hopefully I will be also able to contribute a bit if my situation changes. Now, I don't really know if there is an official process for this kind of shift. I would be nice if potential volunteers would send a few words about the future direction they would take. A community can make a decision then. Best Regards, Pavol

3 6

[config, c++11] emplace_back check?
by Tim Blechmann 26 Dec '11

26 Dec '11

hi all, i wonder, is there a way to determine, if std::vector provides emplace_back? this currently causes a compile failure for boost.heap on gcc-4.3 with c++0x enabled: it does not implement emplace_back, although it has rvalue references and variadic templates. thanks, tim

1 0

boost releases on microblogs
by Pedro Larroy 25 Dec '11

25 Dec '11

Hi Wouldn't it be nice to have twitter and identi.ca anouncements of boost releases? Regards. Pedro.

1 0

Re: [boost] FW: Proposal for a Differential Evolution C++ library
by Adrian Michel 24 Dec '11

24 Dec '11

Hi Philip, On 12/09/2011 4:35 PM, Philip Bennefall wrote: >> The full documentation is at http://www.amichel.com/de/doc/html but I'd >> suggest these pages for a first read >> http://www.amichel.com/de/doc/html/dd/d53/overview.html and >> http://www.amichel.com/de/doc/html/db/d4e/tutorial.html . >> >> The zip containing the DE C++ library and helper files is at >> http://www.amichel.com/de/de.zip. >> >> The DE main page is at http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~storn/code.html . > I took a peak at the overview and some of the other pages and from what I > can see initially, it looks like a very useful library for artificial > intelligence. I have very limited knowledge in the field but this is > something that grabs my interest, so if it's made public I'll definitely use > Thanks for your interest. DE and this library can be certainly used for AI, but many different problems in various areas can be optimized efficiently using DE (references to some of those can be found here: http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~storn/code.html) Best, Adrian

5 4