> > People
> are actively
> > working on it though, see the forum on stlport.org.
>
> It seems, adding STLport/any recent gcc version to the tests makes
> only limited sense at the moment. I'm inclined not to add such a
> configuration, now.
A
> May I come with a bit of scepticism? There's already XUL (see
> http://xulplanet.com for a start, and
> http://www.mozilla.org/catalog/architecture/xul/ for more details).
> I think Mozilla folks put some effort into it, so I wonder if
> XMLUI offers
> something new/better?
I would say that tar
Now that the interest for this kind of library has been shown (or not,
whatever) could the interested parties please coordinate their efforts
using other means than boost mailing list? IIUC this list is for issues
with existing code (problems, usage patterns etc) and for submissions
that have some
> You can use the parts independently
> There is no install required
> You have the complete code, you include the appropriate header!
Yes, for the 'header-only' libraries, filesystem library is not one of
them.
> Boost isn't like most 3rd party libraries in the sense of a dll (or
> similar) wh
Could you please be more specific? What do you mean by "domain
specific"?
> -Original Message-
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 30. jul 2003 21:54
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [boost] Re: GUI/GDI template library
>
>
>
> Has anyone given thought to the des
> The problem, IIRC, is that if wchar_t is just a synonym for
> unsigned short, then unless the wide character handling is
> disabled in lexical_cast, it will give errors if it's used
> with unsigned short (such as in the Date/Time library), and
> people weren't too happy about that, understand
> > There was a message few weeks ago that did not get
> satisfactory answer
>
> hm, I may have missed this message..
Well, like my previous post it ended up with debate about
BOOST_TESTED_AT macro and not this case :)
> you're right there was an inconsistency.
> but the lines you're quoting
> No it does *not*. Please re-read the docs.
OK, mea culpa, I've read them again.
> I have no opinion on which one is better for this case, but they are
> different!
Good, goes along well with my point - boost code for format uses
_different_ macros to detect the same thing. The result is that
Hello,
There was a message few weeks ago that did not get satisfactory answer
IMHO. It's about compiler workaround in boost/format/feed_args.hpp (note
that we use VC7.1):
[original]
#if BOOST_WORKAROUND( BOOST_MSVC, BOOST_TESTED_AT(1300))
[fixed]
#if BOOST_WORKAROUND( BOOST_MSVC, <= 1300)
At the
> That's because void_ is for MPL internal use only; it's not a type
> you should manipulate (I think Aleksey doesn't believe me, but I'm
> about to prove it... ).
It's quite all right - my code does not use that "other" type, I just
need a type. I could have just as well used my own "class null_t
> > Btw, VC7.1 does not seem to like identity in this (and
> David's) scenario
> > - it complains that it does not have inner typedef to type,
> even though
> > it does.
>
> Can you please post a small example which fails?
Well, your own :) from few hours ago, used something like this (btw, I
> Yes, but leor's package has been much improved and provides things
> VC7.1 does not. See http://www.bdsoft.com/dist/gccmeta-demo.txt
I don't know if you've seen VC7.1 error reports, but they look almost
exactly like that example... Something like this:
boost\mpl\size.hpp(36) : error C2039: 'ty
> It's a pitfall that is easy to fall into even if you've read about
> it. The correct way to implement what you want would be
>
> typedef typename boost::mpl::apply_if_c<(numParams > 2),
> boost::mpl::at_c,
> boost::mpl::identity
> >::type Param1;
>
> We have a whole
> Just a note: Loki (generic programming applied to design patterns) and
> MPL (C++ template metaprogramming) preally have a different focus; you
> may yet find some Loki components that are useful to you.
That's possible, but hasn't happened up to now. Actually, I had to replace loki with
severa
Hello,
I've recently discovered that mpl provides all the functionality I was previously
using from loki, so I decided to switch. There is one small thing driving me crazy,
and I was wondering if I missed something...
I was using loki's TypeAtNonStrict "algorithm" to give me type from type list
Hi,
My company is using boost and we would very much like to use variant
library immediately and not wait for the next official release of boost.
Now, we know that this might not be sensible, but we are ready to take
the risk. At the same time, we don't want to break anything else in the
boost (an
Hello,
I am using boost 1_30_0 (NOT current cvs snapshot) and Visual Studio.NET
2003. There is a strange problem with lexical_cast in the following
scenario (rough aproximation of my code, all in one header):
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& out, const ConcreteType& v);
namespace foo
{
17 matches
Mail list logo
