"Joel de Guzman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Aleksey Gurtovoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> My current understanding (which, admittedly, is not backed up by a
>> real-world experience) is that if you care about higher-orderness of your
>> generic algorithms, a
Hi,
I have now run the regression tests on a Cray SV1 but it seems there is
still a problem in the postprocessing stage. I get output like:
generating html tables:
Using /u/ph/troyer/boost/status/bin/bind_test.test to determine
compilers
Missing jam_log.xml in target
"/u/ph/troyer/boost/status
- Original Message -
From: "Aleksey Gurtovoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> My current understanding (which, admittedly, is not backed up by a
> real-world experience) is that if you care about higher-orderness of your
> generic algorithms, a preferred implementation construct for those
> algor
Hi,
Question why is mpl::void_t an incomplete type? Sometimes I need
to instantiate it. For example to signal a zero arity functor call:
typename actor_result >::type
operator()() const
{
return this->eval(void_t());
}
template
typenam
Can I use this library to implement multiple undo/redo in GUI applications
under Windows? For example in a word processor.
Mohammed
- Original Message -
From: "Pavel Vozenilek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 1:15 AM
Subject: [boost] Re: Re: undo
- Original Message -
From: "Aleksey Gurtovoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> My current understanding (which, admittedly, is not backed up by a
> real-world experience) is that if you care about higher-orderness of your
> generic algorithms, a preferred implementation construct for those
> algorit
David Abrahams wrote:
> Terje Slettebø <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Perhaps it might be possible to do some compile-time/run-time lambda
> > (similar to Boost.Lambda for runtime, and MPL's lambda), so you
> > could do something like:
> >
> > mpl::for_each(my_function<_>(s));
> >
> > It would th
At 02:21 PM 1/23/2003, Fernando Cacciola wrote:
>
>"William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Fernando Cacciola said:
>> > "William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> Fernando Cacciola said:
>> >> However, shouldn't yo
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:25:40 -0800, "Andrei Alexandrescu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> inline void do_my_function(string&, void_) {}
>
> template
> inline void do_my_function(string& s, Lst lst)
> {
> my_function::type>(s);
> do_my_function(s, pop_front::type());
> }
>
> do_my_fu
Hi Paul,
you wrote:
> > I've been looking into an earlier version of the proposed math constants
> > before and asked myself how to implement a generic function like
> >
> > template
> > T circle_area (const T &radius) {
> > return math_constants::pi * radius * radius;
> > }
> >
> > How shoul
"Andrei Alexandrescu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
b0pu01$bqd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:b0pu01$bqd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Al Stevens has an article in a past DDJ about a generic undo/redo library,
> can anyone dig it out? I recall it was interesting.
>
Can be purchased here: https://www.sdme
Al Stevens has an article in a past DDJ about a generic undo/redo library,
can anyone dig it out? I recall it was interesting.
Andrei
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Hi all,
I've just committed my current ublas version to Boost CVS. Many thanks this
time namely to John Maddock for his Borland related fixes (really a big
patch) and to Alexei Novakov for his sparse matrix related work.
Best,
Joerg
P.S.: I had to touch status/Jamfile once again. I've hopefully
> > Look on MPL example for inherit_linear. It may have what you need.
>
> Well, as I said, I'm new... I can find mpl documentation, but searches
> for inherit_linear came up with nothing.
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/boost/boost/libs/mpl/example/
inherit_linearly.cpp?rev=1.1&
"Rozental, Gennadiy" wrote:
>
> First of all there are several glitches here:
> I am not sure that you allowed to use template parameter for defining
> partial specialization.
Well, is it allowed? I am new to generic programming stuff, so forgive
any stupid comments I make... If I remember r
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 07:56 PM, Matthias Troyer wrote:
Dear Boost Jamers,
Our local Cray adminstrators (Bruno Loepfe from ETH and Olivier Byrde
from Cray) found a bug in the boost jam sources. it is in the file
hash.c:
keyval = keyval * 2147059363 + *b++;
Besi
"Steven Mauceri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
000f01c2c301$fca17ae0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:000f01c2c301$fca17ae0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi Andreas,
>
[snip]
> Some things ive come across include:
>
[snip]
Undo library may also provide features like:
- user friendly description of what is
"Fredrik Blomqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
b0pj3o$p42$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:b0pj3o$p42$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This is interesting stuff, but I think you should checkout Emily Winch's
> more general compile-time associative list implementation also.
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/b
First of all there are several glitches here:
> template
> class named_pair{
> public:
> template
> class var{};
>
template<>?
> class var<_Name1>{
I am not sure that you allowed to use template parameter for defining
partial specialization.
> public:
> _T1 value;
> }
This is interesting stuff, but I think you should checkout Emily Winch's
more general compile-time associative list implementation also.
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/alist-feb14-02.zip seems to be
the latest)
What's the status of the Emily's lib btw? Is an MPL/Boost integration under
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 03:26:52 +0200, "Vesa Karvonen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm sorry, but I have too little time to comment more extensively on this
>subject
No problem. I just have to thank you for the attention and the useful
comments. Feel also free to continue the discussion when
I tried to do the following implementation in visual studio 6 to see if
I could get a named pair class.
I tried a number of approaches, but none worked with my compiler. Is my
approach fundamentally flawed?
I think that something like this would be a useful utility to have.
Anyone have any id
"William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Fernando Cacciola said:
> > "William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> Fernando Cacciola said:
> >> However, shouldn't you be using "run" instead of
> >> "unit-test" in the Jam
These are a couple of miscellaneous thoughts as well:
John Spicer wrote:
>I'm happy to voice an opinion, although I don't think I
>have anything to add that hasn't already been said.
>
>I think that is_convertible should be based as closely
>as possible on the definition in clause 4 of the
>stand
"William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Fernando Cacciola said:
>> "William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> Fernando Cacciola said:
>>> However, shouldn't you be using "run" instead of
>>> "unit-test" in the Jamfile?
>>>
>> Yes :-) I was looking at the wrong examples.
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> >> No, I mean the complexity-of-expression issue.
> >
> > Hmmm, I don't see how that issue applies.
>
> I don't know what you mean by that. Are you sayin
Fernando Cacciola said:
> "William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Fernando Cacciola said:
>> However, shouldn't you be using "run" instead of
>> "unit-test" in the Jamfile?
>>
> Yes :-) I was looking at the wrong examples.
>
> Fixed now. (could you re-test it?)
$ bjam
Jamfile:
On Thursday, January 23, 2003, at 07:14 PM, Dan Gohman wrote:
Hi Matthias,
The reason for special-casing the Cray X1 here is so that int_fast16_t
isn't defined to be short, as short has performance penalties
associated
with it on this platform.
Hi Dan,
I missed that point. Yes, you are right
"David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Fernando Cacciola said:
> >> I've committed "Jamfile" to libs/optional/test.
> >>
> >> But I can't run bjam on my Win98 configuration (long comm
On Thursday 23 January 2003 11:01 pm, William E. Kempf wrote:
> Can anyone explain to me what's wrong on my system that -lrt isn't finding
> the library?
You need to install glibc-devel. Issuing "urpmi glibc-devel" as root should do
it. Mandrake separates runtime and devel packages and thus if yo
Hi Matthias,
The reason for special-casing the Cray X1 here is so that int_fast16_t
isn't defined to be short, as short has performance penalties associated
with it on this platform.
I can't guarantee I'll be able to test jam, but I'll let you know if I
get to it.
Dan
On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 11:4
"William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Fernando Cacciola said:
> > I've committed "Jamfile" to libs/optional/test.
> >
> > But I can't run bjam on my Win98 configuration (long command lines
> > problem), so I can't test it.
>
> Does
Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>> >> AFAICT it
>> >> doesn't solve the problem that Andrei was pointing at.
>> >
>> > You mean the f
"William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Fernando Cacciola said:
>> I've committed "Jamfile" to libs/optional/test.
>>
>> But I can't run bjam on my Win98 configuration (long command lines
>> problem), so I can't test it.
>
> Doesn't bjam have a fix for this issue?
For most cases, yes.
Yo
Hi Dan,
I don't think this will be needed since on the X1 USHRT_MAX should be
0x, and thus the default version will work. Note that the patch for
the SV1 and other Crays that I submitted checks for USHRT_MAX being
0x and thus does not apply on the X1 anyways.
On another note, I got
Fernando Cacciola said:
> I've committed "Jamfile" to libs/optional/test.
>
> But I can't run bjam on my Win98 configuration (long command lines
> problem), so I can't test it.
Doesn't bjam have a fix for this issue?
> Could someone test the jamfile? If it works, I'l add the entry on
> status/Ja
Hi Andreas,
An undo library seems to be on a boundary between patterns and library
functions, so im interested in seeing how something like an undo library
plays out.
Some things ive come across include:
- The need to keep objects utilized in doIt() alive until they leave the
undo list (this som
Sorry for this slightly off topic question, but I'm not a Linux user by
trade. I've recently switched distributions to Mandrake 9.0, which comes
with GCC 3.2 out of the box. When trying to compile Boost.Threads on this
platform I encounter the following problem:
gcc-Link-action
.../../../libs/th
The recent change to boost/cstdint.hpp for Cray systems is not
appropriate for the Cray X1. It has a 16-bit short type, however there
are performance penalties associated with it.
The following patch for cstdint.hpp sets up the appropriate typedefs for
this platform.
diff -u -r1.29 cstdint.hpp
--
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> >> AFAICT it
> >> doesn't solve the problem that Andrei was pointing at.
> >
> > You mean the front/pop_front issue?
>
> No, I mean the complexity-of-expr
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:22:02 -0500, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hugo Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Including for_each.hpp on bcc561 gives
> >
> > Error E2230
> > c:\usr\boost\boost/mpl/aux_/preprocessed/bcc/template_arity.hpp
> > 20: In-line data member initialization re
"Beman Dawes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> At 01:56 PM 1/22/2003, Douglas Paul Gregor wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Fernando Cacciola wrote:
> >> So, what else should I do? Is there something I need to setup in order
> to
> >> add option
"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> From: "John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >From Peter Dimov:
>>
>> >Nope, it says nothing AFAICS. A type cannot be convertible. Only values
>> are.
>> >And you cannot say "a value of type From is implicitly convertible to To
>> >(4.0)" because you need
Hugo Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Including for_each.hpp on bcc561 gives
>
> Error E2230
> c:\usr\boost\boost/mpl/aux_/preprocessed/bcc/template_arity.hpp
> 20: In-line data member initialization requires an
> integral constant expression
>
> Any chance of finding a fix for this? I am hav
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> I've been watching this thread go by; kept a bunch of messages in my
> inbox because I didn't know what to make of them, and now I realize I
> still don't. It looks like there is going to be a big learning curve
> for me; I have practically no XML/XSLT
Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Why don't we have
>> >
>> > mpl::list list_of_types;
>> > for_each(list_of_types.begin(), list_of_types.end(), f);
>> >
>> > ?
>> >
>> > The
Including for_each.hpp on bcc561 gives
Error E2230 c:\usr\boost\boost/mpl/aux_/preprocessed/bcc/template_arity.hpp 20:
In-line data member initialization requires an integral constant expression
Any chance of finding a fix for this? I am having problems working through the code
to see what to
From: "Rene Rivera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Don't know about other *BSD-s but GCC on OpenBSD GCC defines
> _POSIX_THREADS=1 when the -pthread is used. Here are the details...
GCC 2.95.3/MinGW defines _MT=1 when -mthreads is used. GCC 2.96/Linux
defines _REENTRANT=1 when -pthread is used.
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Why don't we have
> >
> > mpl::list list_of_types;
> > for_each(list_of_types.begin(), list_of_types.end(), f);
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Then an unqualified for_each call can handle type sequences, he
[2003-01-23] William E. Kempf wrote:
>> I think I may be the one who broke a lot of the OpenBSD regression tests
>> by defining BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in the OpenBSD platform configuration.
>> IMO this is correct (OpenBSD supports pthreads right?),
Yes it does... with the -pthread flag.
>> but it ca
I've been watching this thread go by; kept a bunch of messages in my
inbox because I didn't know what to make of them, and now I realize I
still don't. It looks like there is going to be a big learning curve
for me; I have practically no XML/XSLT experience to begin with, not
to mention that I do
David Abrahams said:
> "William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> John Maddock said:
>>> I think I may be the one who broke a lot of the OpenBSD regression
>>> tests by defining BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in the OpenBSD platform
>>> configuration. IMO this is correct (OpenBSD supports pthreads
>>
"William E. Kempf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John Maddock said:
>> I think I may be the one who broke a lot of the OpenBSD regression tests
>> by defining BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in the OpenBSD platform configuration.
>> IMO this is correct (OpenBSD supports pthreads right?), but it causes a
>> pro
John Maddock said:
> I think I may be the one who broke a lot of the OpenBSD regression tests
> by defining BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in the OpenBSD platform configuration.
> IMO this is correct (OpenBSD supports pthreads right?), but it causes a
> problem: currently the gcc config unconditionally define
Douglas Paul Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why don't we have
>
> mpl::list list_of_types;
> for_each(list_of_types.begin(), list_of_types.end(), f);
>
> ?
>
> Then an unqualified for_each call can handle type sequences, heterogeneous
> containers (e.g., tuple), and run-time sequences (e
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> I've been talking with Aleksey recently about how to improve the
> syntactic situation without losing the separation of concerns that we
> get, but we didn't come up with anything convincingly better. I think
> a long time ago the for_each parameter use
Hi Stefan!
Well you could implement it like this (if that works, didn't test it yet).
Although you would still need a wrapping undo_list class, to implement all
the undo/redo-relationship, the checks "is the undo-vector already empty"
etc., basically everything that's in my undo_list class already
"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> I've been talking with Aleksey recently about how to improve the
>> syntactic situation without losing the separation of concerns that we
>> get, but we didn't come up with anything convincingly better.
Just one thought : couldn't much of this be achieved without having to
create your own undo classes by boost::functions and the boost::bind
library?
for example, to implement just the undo (untested code, just to give an
idea, I'm not suggesting that this wouldn't be better wrapped in an
undo_list
From: "John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >From Peter Dimov:
>
> >Nope, it says nothing AFAICS. A type cannot be convertible. Only values
> are.
> >And you cannot say "a value of type From is implicitly convertible to To
> >(4.0)" because you need to specify whether that value is an lvalue of
type
Hello there!
I just wanted to ask if there would be someone interested in a framework
library for undo/redo-functionality. In other C++ groups sometimes the
question pops up, how to implement undo-functionality. Since I've written
such thing as part of a programm of mine and since I have it "boost
> >Well the wording in the standardisation proposal says:
> >
> >"value: defined to be true only if type From is implicitly-convertible to
> >type To (4.0).
> >
> >Which really says it all IMO (by reference to section 4.0 of the
standard.
>
> Gulp! In the ISO proposal???
OK it needs tightening up:
I think I may be the one who broke a lot of the OpenBSD regression tests by
defining BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in the OpenBSD platform configuration. IMO this
is correct (OpenBSD supports pthreads right?), but it causes a problem:
currently the gcc config unconditionally defines BOOST_HAS_THREADS,
basica
From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I've been talking with Aleksey recently about how to improve the
> syntactic situation without losing the separation of concerns that we
> get, but we didn't come up with anything convincingly better. I think
> a long time ago the for_each parameter
>From: "Terje Slettebø" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I can imagine something like this:
>
> template void Function(T)>
> struct for_each;
>
> Possibly using overloaded class templates, as well (another possible
> extension).
Come to think of it, the latter wouldn't be needed here, as for_each is a
func
>From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Terje Slettebø <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Perhaps it might be possible to do some compile-time/run-time lambda
> > (similar to Boost.Lambda for runtime, and MPL's lambda), so you could do
> > something like:
> >
> > mpl::for_each(my_function
Beman Dawes wrote:
> There are two other versions we might want to consider eliminating (KISS):
>
>Messages only - Shows status only for tests with warnings or failures.
>Failures only - Shows status only for tests with failures.
>
> I never find myself looking at those. Does anyone else
67 matches
Mail list logo
