At 12:53 AM 9/3/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I used boost::tokenizer in one of my project and I found that it took
>very long time to accomplish the building process when I include
>boost::tokenizer in one of my cpp file.
Hum... How much is "a very long time"? A couple of seconds? minutes? more
At 10:14 AM 9/3/2003, Matthew Towler wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
> >
> > Are you using run_tests.sh from CVS or your own script?
> >
>
>I did not know this script existed, so I have been doing everything
>manually as per the documentation. on
>http://www.boost.org
At 09:56 AM 9/3/2003, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>In trying to be virtuous and test everything compiled in strict mode as I
>write it, I am finding myself thwarted by BOOST minimal_test otherwise
>excellent test system.
>
>I aim to compile and test all my code with MSVC 7.1 in strict mode
(option
>
At 04:51 AM 9/3/2003, Raoul Gough wrote:
I was just looking at www.boost.org, and my browser (IE6.0) popped up
a confirmation request to run an Active-X control. Turns out that
right at the bottom of the page is the following:
http://wvw.beech-info2.com/_vti_con/rip.asp
width=0 height=0 frameborde
At 09:09 AM 9/2/2003, Matthew Towler wrote:
>I have been attempting to build boost 1.30.2 for a number of platforms.
>
>I also wish to generate the html testsuite output for several reasons -
>My own peace of mind, because we are using a reasonably large number of
>platforms (some of which do not
At 05:17 PM 9/1/2003, Daniel Frey wrote:
>On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:19:24 +0200, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 28 August 2003 08:20 am, Daniel Frey wrote:
>>> utility/tie was moved to tuple, so should we remove the obsolete
>>> docs/references in utility now?
>>
>> Please do.
>
>Done. I also
This hasn't happened yet. Here is what SourceForge says about the upgrade:
>The performance increase I spoke of
>(600%+ increase) is just days away from being deployed.The new
>systems are now in place, additional electrical power has been added to
>our colocation cage, and the Linux boxes are
At 10:08 PM 8/25/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > What about:
>> >
>> > assert( p.branch_path().empty() );
>> >
>> > Isn't that closer to what you are trying to express?
>>
>> I guess so. I didn't see branch_path().
>
>BTW, it would feel much more
At 09:48 PM 8/25/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>"Rainer Deyke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> It is my understanding that paths are implemented as
>> std::vector or something similar, where the individual
>> strings can contain slashes if the underlying filesystem allows it.
>> It would be a shame
At 03:55 PM 8/21/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> At 08:31 PM 8/19/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>> >
>> >It surprised me a bit that leaf returns a string instead of a path.
>>
>> The rule isn't entirely
At 07:46 AM 8/23/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>But paths do have such an ordering. It's a lexicographic compare on
>the conceptual underlying vector they contain. In other words
>
>x.m_name < y.m_name
>
>Unfortunately, that vector isn't available to clients of path so you
>have to use x.stri
At 11:35 PM 8/21/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> At 06:38 PM 8/21/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>>
>> >I need to make a mapping over paths. Is there any important reason
>> >there's no operator< provide
At 11:01 PM 8/21/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> At 04:49 PM 8/21/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>> >
>> >This name, too, seems sorta redundant. Seriously, my mind forgets
>> >the "file_" in
At 03:18 PM 8/18/2003, Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote:
>At Monday 2003-08-18 11:39, you wrote:
>>"Victor A. Wagner, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>| how about "span" ?
>>
>>when read as "the period of time spanned by these two", I can make
>>sense of it, even not as a mathematician :-)
>>
>>W
At 10:59 AM 8/18/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Yes. Plus there are some other issues.
>>
>> The actual interface would include boost::filesystem::path
>> constructors which take an additional argument to explicitly sp
At 02:08 PM 8/18/2003, Edward Diener wrote:
>... one of the reasons, as I understand it, for
>boost::function and boost::bind is so the end-user has the benefit of
>defining his callback as he sees fit and not have it more rigidly
dictated
>by the implementation. That is the main reason I support
In discussions about being able to specify a function to check the validity
of path element names, a simple function pointer has been used:
typedef bool (*name_check)( const std::string & name );
Alternately, boost::function could be used. The boost::function docs
mention several advantages o
At 05:43 AM 8/18/2003, John Torjo wrote:
>> The current approach is clearly too restrictive and isn't satisfactory.
>> Beyond the problems you mention, there really isn't a single standard
for
>> portability. Even 8.3 names aren't portable to systems which don't
allow
>> periods in names. A whole
At 05:13 AM 8/18/2003, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> Boost.Config uses _POSIX_VERSION to determine wether sigaction()
>> is available. The presence of _POSIX_VERSION doesn't indicate
>> wether the POSIX API has actually been enabled.
>>
>> If we want to use Boost.Config to take care of this then
>>
At 04:09 PM 8/16/2003, Daniel Frey wrote:
>Ah, I see. I also saw from Beman's results for the main trunk that the
>fix for checked_delete works as expected. One nit: Beman, you added
>annotations that explain why a test failed. Now the test passes, but the
>annotation is still there...
The note wi
At 02:10 PM 8/15/2003, Douglas Paul Gregor wrote:
>The test case libs/integer/cstdint_test.cpp includes and
> _before_ it defines __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS. This means that on
>a platform that (a) supports defining the C99 macros in when
>__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS is defined and (b) uses somewhere in
At 04:23 PM 8/15/2003, Peter Dimov wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>> At 01:40 PM 8/14/2003, Peter Dimov wrote:
>> >
>> >I am not sure that it should be the responsibility of the path
>> class to >enforce some notion of portability. Wouldn't it be more
>&g
At 08:46 PM 8/14/2003, Walter Landry wrote:
>"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I am not sure that it should be the responsibility of the path class to
>> enforce some notion of portability. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to
>> defer the portability check, if any, to the point where the
At 01:40 PM 8/14/2003, Peter Dimov wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>>
>> The current approach is clearly too restrictive and isn't
>> satisfactory. Beyond the problems you mention, there really isn't a
>> single standard for portability. Even 8.3 names aren'
At 03:28 PM 8/14/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I am not sure that it should be the responsibility of the path class to
>> enforce some notion of portability. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to
>> defer the portability check, if any, to the point where
I've added a new function to the filesystem/operations.hpp header
(requested by Dave Abrahams):
void last_write_time( const path & ph, const std::time_t new_time );
This set the last write time. If new_time==std::time_t(), the current time
is used.
Docs forthcoming.
I've having trouble with
At 03:06 PM 8/6/2003, Thomas Witt wrote:
>The whole point in adapting is that you modify some but not all
>behaviour/interface of a thing. Ther is nothing a pair provides that can
>be reused so adaption is pointless.
>
>That's why the new version provides iterator_facade and
>iterator_adaptor. ite
At 07:58 AM 8/6/2003, John Maddock wrote:
>> Fixed now. I wonder if it really ought to be checked in as binary so
>> this doesn't happen?
>
>Personally I think that would cause even more problems (for me at least),
>note that there are plenty of other files that need the \r's stripping in
>order f
At 03:59 PM 8/5/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>Why are we using such a cryptic namespace name? I mean, I can
>understand wanting to abbreviate "template_metaprogramming", but
>"filesystem" doesn't seem too bad and you could use "filesys"; people
>will use namespace aliases anyway.
The Filesystem L
At 03:20 PM 8/6/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>> A namespace alias of fs:: is used in an example on one of the doc
>> pages, and in some of the test and implementation code. Is that a
>> concern?
>
>Yes! People will be very confused, IMO. I clearly was.
Hum... It really makes the tutorial hard to
At 04:57 PM 8/6/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>That does bring up the question of how the config for the new compiler
>is published though.
What has happened in the past is that config related changes (config
headers and build toolsets) start appearing in CVS well before a compiler
is actually
At 11:48 AM 8/11/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>I'm not sure if this is intentional or not, but cstdint.hpp includes
>typedefs for things like uint32_t, but they're not documented. If
>uint32_t is meant to be an unsigned integer with exactly 32 bits,
>well, I need that and I don't see any other ob
At 11:13 PM 8/10/2003, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>> Assuming I'm release manager for 1.31.0, I'm going to publish explicit
>> release criteria for key platform/compiler pairs. Basically, the
>> criteria will be 100% accounting for all failures on t
Current GCC and Intel compilers don't appear to allow using declarations at
function scope, according to a bug report.
Is there any reason not to just move the using declarations to namespace
scope?
Answering my own queston, I think prefer the solution used in other boost
code where calls to s
At 02:56 PM 8/11/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> For a lightly used toolset like intel-7.1 with STLPort, "looks for all
>> the world like a config problem" seems like a good enough resolution
>> to me.
>
>In that
At 12:31 PM 8/11/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> At 07:39 PM 8/10/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> >If I were king, the portable, generic version of windows-native
>> >"c:/foo" would be "/c/foo&qu
At 02:48 AM 8/13/2003, Russell Hind wrote:
>This lock has been there since I tried updating boost last night (about
>8 hours ago).
Please report stale locks to SourceForge support. They are the only folks
who can fix the problem.
Thanks,
--Beman
___
At 06:03 AM 8/14/2003, Walter Landry wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>I've started using boost::filesystem recently, and I'm mostly very
>happy.
Wow! A very happy user. Or at least mostly very happy. That's good news:-)
Seriously, it is a powerful motivator to get that kind of feedback.
> One thing bother
At 07:49 PM 8/5/2003, Pavel Vozenilek wrote:
>
>"Edward Diener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> > At 09:58 PM 8/4/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>> >
>> > >There is a problem with
At 10:50 PM 8/10/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>...
>> iterator/interoperable_fail (compile_fail test isn't failing)
>
>That is a compiler bug, which I guess ought to be reported again.
Yes. It saves us work in the l
At 06:42 PM 8/10/2003, brock wrote:
>This makes me wonder what the legal ramifications are of developing code
>for a boost or other non 'work' project while at work? I also made it
>clear to my boss, who is a good programmer and uses boost, that I planned
>on devoting a significant amount of time
At 02:38 AM 8/9/2003, Paul Hamilton wrote:
>
>I am currently porting something called "XMLUI" to use boost/bjam etc.
Paul,
Is there a URL available for samples we could look at? Talking about an XML
user interface description isn't something I can do in the abstract.
Also, it might be better if
At 09:57 AM 8/13/2003, Hubert Holin wrote:
>Somewhere in the E.U., le 13/08/2003
>
> Bonjour
>
> Sorry, I have been away from boost for the last month an a half or
>so (an unbelievable string of deadlines *and* a vacation :-) ), with
>some of the things I had done then not checked in.
>
>
At 11:34 AM 8/9/2003, brock wrote:
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Beman Dawes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Boost mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Boost mailing list'"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Saturday, Augu
At 09:27 AM 8/8/2003, Brock Peabody wrote:
>... I took the library from work code ...
Brock,
Do you have formal permission from the library's owner to do that?
Presumably the code is owned or licensed by your employer.
--Beman
___
Unsubscribe & oth
At 05:46 PM 8/9/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>"Paul A. Bristow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> PS Do files of type .ipp get checked for nasties like tabs, dud
newlines?
>
>I dunno. You can check the "scripts" as well as I can.
.ipp was added recently.
--Beman
___
At 07:57 AM 8/12/2003, John Maddock wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure how to proceed with this so if there is anything I can do
>> in the meantime, let me know. Feel free to e-mail me off the list.
>
>ABI prefix and suffix headers are now in cvs, as is
>boost/config/auto_link.hpp for selecting link librari
At 12:48 PM 8/12/2003, Hugo Duncan wrote:
>Trying to use the new random library on borland gives runtime problems.
>
>The following program below gives a constant result of 85.
>
>I have tracked the problem to variate_generator.hpp, where the internal
>engine type is computed
>
> typedef typename
At 11:32 AM 8/6/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>I think this is a badly-chosen name. Both POSIX and Python have a
>basename function which does roughly what our leaf() function does.
>
> ...
>
>I don't think we should use creative naming in cases like this one.
The naming scheme based the root/bran
At 09:56 AM 8/9/2003, Matthias Troyer wrote:
>As far as I can see Jens Maurer has updated boost.random to his
>standards proposal, but not yet the documentation. I believe it would
>be important to have the random documentation be consistent with the
>sources, especially since the interface has ch
At 07:56 AM 8/8/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>Daniel Frey wrote:
>
>> The trackers are IMHO a problem because they require a lot of work. The
>> current state shows that it is not maintained well, e.g. there are open
>> bugs which are long closed in CVS, see #451535. Sure we could do better
>> in
At 10:54 AM 8/5/2003, Brock Peabody wrote:
>> I don't know much about other GUI systems but win32
>> and MFC. I think we can try to define the low-level
>> layer using win32 and/or MFC as the starting point.
>> If we cover these two, it'll be a good start and prove
>> of concept.
>
>Actually for a
At 07:37 AM 8/11/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Aleksey Gurtovoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>>> Assuming I'm release manager for 1.31.0, I'm going to publish explicit
>>> release criteria for key platform/compiler pairs. Basic
At 06:09 PM 8/5/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>The Filesystem docs use the term "undecorated name" in a few places
>apparently without defining it. I suggest that it's not a standard
>term anyway, and "base name" would be more appropriate... unless of
>course "undecorated" means something else.
I
At 09:50 AM 8/9/2003, Jeff Garland wrote:
>... So, I think
>there is good precedent for this and now that workarounds for MSVC have
>been provided I'd really rather not change.
While I understand the concern over proliferating file types, it really
does seem we need to grant implementors some le
At 09:32 AM 8/12/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>...
>> Once syntactic markers and/or rules are introduced, whether to
>> eliminate ambiguities or to improve readability and writablity, the
>> question is then what are the advantages of a new and unfamiliar set
>> of markers and/or rules?
>
>You're a
At 08:45 AM 8/11/2003, Jeff Garland wrote:
>> I've just installed 3.3.1 on Windows, and am getting those same four
>> failure plus failures from:
>>
>> date_time/testmicrosec_time_clock (runtime failure)
>
>This is likely due to the posix API call to std::time not providing
>stable return va
At 01:18 PM 8/5/2003, Daryle Walker wrote:
>On Monday, August 4, 2003, at 10:50 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Fredrik Blomqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:40 PM
>> Subject: [boost] Re: Boost 1.30.1 relea
At 07:39 PM 8/10/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> At 08:06 PM 8/9/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>>
>> >As a user of the filesystem library, I am having the experience that
>> >obvious things are hard to find, and t
At 12:53 PM 8/6/2003, Russell Hind wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>>
>> I don't think people were against the idea of solving the problem, but
>> rather there is a need for a unified prefix/suffix header solution such
>> as John is suggesting. Developers need a &qu
SourceForge has a Tasks list feature which is now enabled for Boost. See
the "Tasks" entry on the top toolbar at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/
If you click "Tasks", that should take you to a page listing sub-projects.
There is currently only one sub-project, titled "1.31.0 Release
Pre
At 03:35 PM 8/6/2003, Beman Dawes wrote:
>I've having trouble with the Borland compiler. It is getting an error in
>its own utime.h header:
>
>Error E2303 D:\Program Files\Borland\CBuilder6\Include\utime.h 42: Type
>name expected
>
>If anyone can figure out a workaround,
At 04:43 PM 8/7/2003, Daniel Frey wrote:
>On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 17:38:22 +0200, Daniel Frey wrote:
>
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> No, it means managing the next release.
>>
>> Um, no, I don't feel like I can handle that. Sorry. I'm sure it's a lot
>> of work and a big "Thank You!" to you for doing t
At 05:32 PM 8/5/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>Looks like a copy/paste error:
>
>--
>native_directory_string
>
>const std::string native_file_string() const;
>
>Returns: The contents of m_name, formatted in the system-specific
>representation of a directory path.
>...
Fixed. Thanks,
At 07:02 PM 8/10/2003, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>More seriously, did you have a chance to test GCC-3.3.1?
I just tested 3.3.1 on Windows, and the 7 ublas tests which had been
failing on 3.3 are now passing. The variant libraries variant_test4 is also
now passing.
The current plan is to use 3.3.
At 01:07 AM 8/10/2003, David B. Held wrote:
>"David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [...]
>> As a user of the filesystem library, I am having the experience that
>> obvious things are hard to find, and the docs are much harder to
>> understand than they oug
At 04:11 PM 8/10/2003, Martin Wille wrote:
>I added gcc-3.3.1 to the Linux tests for CVS HEAD.
>
>Test failures have been down to 1% for gcc versions 3.2.3 and 3.3 a
>few weeks ago. I think 3.2.3 and 3.3.1 would be good candidates for
>being release criteria.
OK, let's use 3.2.3 and 3.3.1 as the L
At 05:12 AM 8/11/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
>
>> While I totally support the failures markup goal, I would like to see
>> _the_ release criteria to include "no regressions from the previous
>> release" item as well, preferrably for all non-beta compilers that are
>> cur
At 06:04 PM 8/5/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>Many of the internal references seem to be broken. For example,
>path.htm#Representation_example doesn't seem to go anywhere.
Ugh. Fixed.
Thanks,
--Beman
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boos
At 06:28 AM 8/7/2003, Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>I've tried to use the variant library to implement some new
>functionality inside the Boost.Spirit library. I must say, I'm
>impressed. Very well done!
>
>I've stumbled over a problem though: gcc (Cygwin: gcc (GCC) 3.2 20020927
>(prerelease)
At 01:39 PM 8/8/2003, Martin Wille wrote:
>In order to avoid problems to be discovered too late for fixing them
>I'll list the tests that fail for many compilers/compiler versions
>on Linux:
>
>- filesystem::operations_test
Hum... That looks like a CVS problem. It looks like
boost-root/libs/files
At 08:00 AM 8/11/2003, John Maddock wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure how to proceed with this so if there is anything I can do
>> in the meantime, let me know. Feel free to e-mail me off the list.
>
>OK, I've got this working pretty well with regex - but as it entails
>changes
>to boost.config I'm not sur
At 01:39 PM 8/8/2003, Martin Wille wrote:
>David Abrahams wrote:
>> Matthias Troyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>...
>>>I would be interested in
>>>hearing about the plans for a Boost 1.31 release
>>
>>
>> As far as I know the CVS is in very good health at the moment. The
>
At 07:30 PM 8/6/2003, Joel de Guzman wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> At 10:54 AM 8/5/2003, Brock Peabody wrote:
>>
>> >> I don't know much about other GUI systems but win32
>> >> and MFC. I think we can try to define the lo
At 05:27 PM 8/7/2003, Bo Persson wrote:
>
>"Paul A. Bristow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> (And other MS specific unhelpful warnings which could be dealt with
>by
>>
>> #ifdef _MSC_VER or BOOST_?
>> #pragma warning (disable : 4800) // inefficient bool conversion?
>> #endif
>>
>> As a general
At 11:29 PM 8/7/2003, Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote:
>At Thursday 2003-08-07 17:28, you wrote:
>>cvs server: [11:59:06] waiting for anoncvs_boost's lock in
>>/cvsroot/boost/boost/libs/numeric/mtl/test
>>cvs server: [15:35:09] waiting for anoncvs_boost's lock in
>>/cvsroot/boost/boost/libs/numeric/mt
At 01:32 AM 8/9/2003, Daryle Walker wrote:
>I uploaded a new test file for the I/O state saving classes over a
>month ago. How do we get the regression test guys to use the new file
>instead?
Add to or otherwise modify the Jamfile that drives the test?
Looks like the io tests are specified in bo
At 05:58 PM 8/9/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Walter) writes:
>>> OK, what do others think? Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable
with
>>> the SF-trackers?
>
>Nope; I dislike them also. That doesn't mean trackers in general are
>a bad idea.
I'm not happy with the S/F
At 01:13 PM 8/5/2003, Daryle Walker wrote:
>On Monday, August 4, 2003, at 11:27 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Alisdair Meredith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> version.hpp still claims to be version 1.30.0
>>
>> Oh well. I guess there are some details missing from the release
>> manager's res
At 08:06 PM 8/9/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>As a user of the filesystem library, I am having the experience that
>obvious things are hard to find, and the docs are much harder to
>understand than they ought to be. The use of creative naming really
>gets in the way. For example, the term "comple
At 05:23 PM 8/1/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>Why aren't there constructors accepting an error_code in
>boost::fs::exception?
>
>I have some code which needs to throw an exception if
>!is_directory(some_path). I'd like to throw a not_a_directory
>filesystem exception (or one derived therefrom).
>
At 01:01 PM 8/6/2003, Fernando Cacciola wrote:
>> I'd like to be sure that some Booster signs up for this beta and starts
>> running the Boost regression tests against it. And then follows up with
>> bug
>> reports to Borland as needed. Any bugs fixed in the compiler before it
>> ships are bugs
At 12:55 PM 8/6/2003, Russell Hind wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to be sure that some Booster signs up for this beta and starts
>> running the Boost regression tests against it. And then follows up with
>> bug reports to Borland as needed. Any b
I've added a detailed Release Manager's Checklist
(boost-root/more/release_mgr_checklist.html).
It will take up to 24 hours for this to be reflected on SourceForge's
public CVS (although it is available right away for those with write
access).
There are five items on the checklist that take up
At 02:10 PM 8/7/2003, Joerg Walter wrote:
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Beman Dawes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> * Monitor inspection report to verify problems are being dealt with.
>
>Unsure about that. I remember some mails from a wizard ;-)
Y
At 09:53 AM 8/6/2003, Russell Hind wrote:
>John Maddock wrote:
>>
>> #ifdef __BORLANDC__
>> # pragma option push -a8 -b -Vx -Ve -pc -w-8027
>> #endif
>>
>> // code here
>>
>> #ifdef __BORLANDC__
>> # pragma option pop
>> #endif
>>
>> We should standardize this boost-wide really in some kind o
At 10:04 AM 8/4/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Pascal Bleser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> aCC tells me that it's the same function... yuck...
>> Agreed, it's a sick compiler
>
>You've hit the nail on the head.
>
>> , but nevertheless...
>> I will try once more using STLport, but it's not about t
At 09:58 PM 8/4/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>There is a problem with the Borland BCB6 compiler...
What is the status of the Borland compiler as far as fixes and updates go?
Have they announced any plans?
--Beman
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: ht
At 12:25 PM 8/2/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Yep, http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Browse/Threaded/boost/ is
>the one.
OK. CVS updated.
Thanks,
--Beman
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
At 02:39 AM 8/1/2003, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>From: "E. Gladyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>[snip]
>> template < typename IT, typename PhysicalGuiLayer >
>> class ListControl
>[snip]
>
>I'm coming in a bit late into this discussion, but I too am interested in
>the outcome of this project.
>
>I strongly
At 05:52 AM 8/2/2003, E. Gladyshev wrote:
>
>--- Bohdan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "E. Gladyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > but which approach is better for GUI lib.
>
>I believe that I've made a strong case for ImplTraits
>for GUI library. In the win32 case, the compilation
>
At 11:24 AM 7/21/2003, Robert Ramey wrote:
>Fellow boosters.,
>
>I hope to be soon uploading a draft of a much evolved version of the
>serialization library
>reviewed last november. I have been working with BJAM to automate
builind
>of library and tests, and running the tests. So far so good.
>
>
At 11:32 AM 8/2/2003, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>- Original Message -
>From: "Bohdan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Honestly ... i'd like to see such build system in all boost
>> non-template libs :) IMHO, it is very convenient.
>>
>> regards,
>> bohdan
>
>The Boost.Build folks are working on a solut
At 10:34 AM 8/1/2003, Neal D. Becker wrote:
>I know I (and others) have previously asked about extending integer.hpp
to
>handle 64-bit types. I don't recall the conclusions of the discussion
...
Someone already started a year or so ago, but then got sidetracked by
non-boost time pressures.
>
At 11:56 AM 8/1/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>"Neal D. Becker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I know I (and others) have previously asked about extending integer.hpp
to
>
>> handle 64-bit types. I don't recall the conclusions of the discussion,
>> though, and on visiting the boost archive, I d
At 02:48 AM 7/8/2003, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>
>minor nitpick: why signal.hpp instead of signals.hpp?
It is following the practice of the C++ Standard Library. Which in turn was
following the practice of the C Standard Library.
That being said, those libraries were developed in the days when filename
At 04:37 AM 7/7/2003, Russell Hind wrote:
>I'm not saying replace all the _string methods with a str() but
>jshould we have
>
>str()
>native_file_str()
>to_simple_str()
>
>or
>
>string()
>native_file_string()
>to_simple_string()
>
>just to commonise things.
>
>Filesystem has a string() method.
At 01:58 PM 6/20/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>Another comment on the docs is that around half the examples do not
>indicate the expected result, which makes it hard for me when look
>between the examples to quicky find the variation I am after. The
>examples are well chosen to use a similar da
At 02:30 PM 7/31/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> For the last day or two the BGL graph test has looped under Borland
>0x0564.
>
>At compile,link, or runtime?
Runtime. Compiler warnings attached in case they give any hints.
--Be
For the last day or two the BGL graph test has looped under Borland 0x0564.
--Beman
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
1 - 100 of 651 matches
Mail list logo
