Re: [boost] (from: [Boost-Users]) [BGL] Preconditioned color maps?

Tarjei Knapstad wrote: > The second problem however is a property of the DFS algorithm where a > starting vertex is given that I had overlooked. After the DFS has > discovered all the vertices reachable from the starting vertex, it will > continue using any yet undiscovered (white) vertices and u

Re: [boost] Re: Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 05:36 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: "Brian Gray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I can see how vector might benefit from conversion to vector, but we're talking about contiguous memory here. Very subject to raw object size, so there's no w

Re: [boost] Eric Ford's Unit package

"Paul A. Bristow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > (Reporting including title) Sorry. Paul > >> This looks most interesting, and there most definitely remains a >> great need for >> a units handling package. >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, please make an

[boost] Re: Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

"Brian Gray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > I can see how vector might benefit from conversion to > vector, but we're talking about contiguous memory here. Very > subject to raw object size, so there's no way to cast between the two > and preserve object hierarchies

[boost] Re: Variant Library Review

> In most part design of the library looks solid and well thought-out( I think > we definitely ought to give Andrei credits for this also). By the way, any chance to tweak the acknowledgments a bit. They mention "Generic: Discriminated Unions" Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. C/C++ Users Journal. 2002", bu

Re: [boost] Re: 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete

At 07:26 PM 3/4/2003, Carl Daniel wrote: >Beman Dawes wrote: >> At 04:01 PM 3/3/2003, Mark Rodgers wrote: >> >How many extra people would be encourage to test the beta? >> >> Good question. Are there others interested in a beta? > >I'd love to see beta releases (ZIP'd & packaged like a full releas

Re: [boost] Draft dimensions and units library uploaded

Eric, Just took a quick look and the part that caught my eye was the numeric promotion code in numeric_concept.hpp as I just wrote some myself. Attached is my version, that I believe fully supports the builtin types. To allow other types (std::complex for example) I've allowed types to have a pr

[boost] Re: 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete

Beman Dawes wrote: > At 04:01 PM 3/3/2003, Mark Rodgers wrote: > >How many extra people would be encourage to test the beta? > > Good question. Are there others interested in a beta? I'd love to see beta releases (ZIP'd & packaged like a full release). -cd

[boost] Re: Variant Library Review

Gennadiy, I actually began a lengthy reply but my mail program crashed. I'm am too busy with other work right now to start over, I'll have to reply later in the week. However, please know that I have carefully read your review and plan to reply soon. Thanks, Eric Gennadiy Rozental wrote: > Hi,

[boost] Re: Singleton class

Mr. Alexandrescu has an impressive singleton class template in Loki and explained in "Modern C++ Design". Aashit Soni wrote: > hi , > Do we have singleton class? > if we dont have that and think to have it - i'd designed one simple > _singleton<> that works good to make parameter class singleton.

[boost] (from: [Boost-Users]) [BGL] Preconditioned color maps?

On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 21:44, Louis Lavery wrote: [I'm cross posting this to the main list as it contains some discussion wrt. BGL in general as well] I've got it sorted now after having another look at the BGL code, and having made my own version of undirected_dfs... > > In an algorithm I'm wo

[boost] Re: Proposal: strings as template parameters?

Jason House wrote: > If I understand correctly, each file that uses SomeClass > will compile in its own version of SomeClass. Will a compiler remove > the duplicate versions and leave only one copy of SomeClass? I believe that would be a Quality of Implementation issue. A compiler would me

RE: [boost] Re: Formal Review for Boost I/O Library

Further to my previous vote for acceptance of this package, I would like to suggest that the rationale should give some more detail on WHY this is useful compared, for example, with << '\n' or << "\nAnd More" or const char nl = '\n' or making nl a function nl(). and WHEN newl and endl should be

Re: [boost] Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 12:24 PM, Larry Evans wrote: Brian Gray wrote: A raw memory buffer is a good idea. I've rolled my own on a couple of occasions, but never tried to mimic the style of the STL. That approach opens up a couple issues: Since we don't know what's stored in the memory bu

Re: [boost] Re: Proposal: strings as template parameters?

At 01:10 PM 3/4/2003, Jason House wrote: >James Curran wrote: >> >> Both the Standard & MSVC6 allow a (const char*) as a template parameter. >> What is rejected (by both) is a text literal parameter. For a non-type >> parameter, the value must be a constant across all translation units lin

Re: [boost] Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

Brian Gray wrote: A raw memory buffer is a good idea. I've rolled my own on a couple of occasions, but never tried to mimic the style of the STL. That approach opens up a couple issues: Since we don't know what's stored in the memory buffer (image/audio data, chars from an input stream, seria

[boost] Re: Proposal: strings as template parameters?

James Curran wrote: > > Both the Standard & MSVC6 allow a (const char*) as a template parameter. > What is rejected (by both) is a text literal parameter. For a non-type > parameter, the value must be a constant across all translation units linked > together, hence it must be defined exter

Re: [boost] Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

Attached is my implementation. It is not very well tested yet so be careful. On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Brian Gray wrote: > Since we don't know what's stored in the memory buffer (image/audio > data, chars from an input stream, serialized structs, etc.), it would > be useful to be able to parameteri

Re: [boost] Singleton class

On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 03:12 AM, Aashit Soni wrote: Do we have singleton class? if we dont have that and think to have it - i'd designed one simple _singleton<> that works good to make parameter class singleton.. I've done much work with singletons, and I've come around to the opinion tha

[boost] Re: Proposal: strings as template parameters?

Jason House wrote: > Well, I know that in MSVC simply refuses to use strings as template > parameters... If this truly is illegal by the standard, then a string > template parameter could default to a type for that string. As far as > use in other places, maybe use of some keyword as a function

RE: [boost] Variant Library Review

Hi, Since I did not see a response, I would like to post this reminder to make sure that authors did not miss my review and all issues brought are discussed before the library is added to the boost main trunk. Gennadiy. ___ Unsubscribe & other changes:

Re: [boost] Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

A raw memory buffer is a good idea. I've rolled my own on a couple of occasions, but never tried to mimic the style of the STL. That approach opens up a couple issues: Since we don't know what's stored in the memory buffer (image/audio data, chars from an input stream, serialized structs, etc

Re: [boost] boost::bind - cannot convert resulting function object to function pointer

template void callback(int i) { (p->*f)(i); } At 08:02 AM 3/4/2003, Marc Jacobs wrote: >I'm trying to use a member function as a callback to a C-style library. I've >got the bind working by itself, but the resulting function object does not >convert to the type required by the library. Clearly

Re: [boost] 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete

At 09:58 AM 3/4/2003, Peter Dimov wrote: >Beman Dawes wrote: >> At 04:01 PM 3/3/2003, Mark Rodgers wrote: >> >> >Is it time we introduced beta releases into the release procedure? >> It >seems to me that it would be a good idea to tar up 1.30.0 RC and >> give >everyone a chance to try it out and

RE: [boost] New release procedure? [was: 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete]

At 09:53 AM 3/4/2003, Jeff Garland wrote: >Right, sorry for dropping this. As I recall I was hoping for someone more >expert with WinCVS and some of the other tools to fill in the details >of how to make changes. >... The basic CVS procedure for developers looks like it is in >place. I don't th

Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | At 10:03 AM 3/3/2003, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | >I see that when upgrading LyX to use the upcomming 1.30.0 release | >instead of the 1.29.0 release our binary size increases by more than | >125kB... | | Not sure what goes into your "binary size".

[boost] Re: Borland problems with dynamic RTL

"Alisdair Meredith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > It appears the current borland compiler has several problems when > linking with the dyanmic version of the RTL, most noticably (in boost > regressions) wrt std::numeric limits. These problems go away when > linking

Re: [boost] boost::bind - cannot convert resulting function objectto function pointer

On Tuesday 04 March 2003 10:02 am, Marc Jacobs wrote: > I'm trying to use a member function as a callback to a C-style library. > I've got the bind working by itself, but the resulting function object does > not convert to the type required by the library. Clearly a boost::bind > object is not a si

[boost] [bgl] pass by value

Hi Jeremy, I'm just profiling some algorithm. I noticed that dijkstra_shortest_paths takes about 30% more time when predecessors and distance are stored in vector_property_map that I've just wrote. The only potential problem is shared_ptr member in that class, and in fact, it's copy ctor is resp

[boost] boost::bind - cannot convert resulting function object to function pointer

I'm trying to use a member function as a callback to a C-style library. I've got the bind working by itself, but the resulting function object does not convert to the type required by the library. Clearly a boost::bind object is not a simple function pointer and the type is being checked by the com

Re: [boost] 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete

Beman Dawes wrote: > At 04:01 PM 3/3/2003, Mark Rodgers wrote: > > >Is it time we introduced beta releases into the release procedure? > It >seems to me that it would be a good idea to tar up 1.30.0 RC and > give >everyone a chance to try it out and report feedback without > having to >use CVS.

[boost] Re: boost::bind - simple test case does not work...

Thanks. That worked. "Douglas Gregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Monday 03 March 2003 05:03 pm, Marc Jacobs wrote: > > bind( &X::f, &x, _1 )( 6 ); // error! > > You can't pass rvalues to boost::bind function objects, because of the > forwarding problem in

RE: [boost] New release procedure? [was: 1.30.0 branch-for-releasecomplete]

> No one disagreed with this assessment. > > Jeff Garland posts a partially updated set of developer procedures: > http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/1411802/release_procedures.htm > > At this point the discussion fragments into details and corner cases. The > updated release_procedur

Re: [boost] Does this compiler need configuring?

At 02:03 AM 3/4/2003, Daryle Walker wrote: >I'm trying to use the more_io.zip stuff currently under review with a >copy of Metrowerks CodeWarrior Developement Studio (Mac OS X Edition, >v8). I haven't got anything to compile. If there is a question of configuration as John's rely indicates, a goo

Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

At 10:03 AM 3/3/2003, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >I see that when upgrading LyX to use the upcomming 1.30.0 release >instead of the 1.29.0 release our binary size increases by more than >125kB... Not sure what goes into your "binary size". Does that include source code, tests, examples, and docs?

Re: [boost] 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete

At 04:01 PM 3/3/2003, Mark Rodgers wrote: >Is it time we introduced beta releases into the release procedure? It >seems to me that it would be a good idea to tar up 1.30.0 RC and give >everyone a chance to try it out and report feedback without having to >use CVS. I know CVS puts me off. > >Ques

[boost] New release procedure? [was: 1.30.0 branch-for-release complete]

At 06:45 PM 3/1/2003, David Abrahams wrote: >Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> The tag is RC_1_30_0 > >Didn't we agree that we were going to tag the trunk and generally do >any merges from the trunk to the branch? This tag appears to be on >the branch AFAICT. OK, I've now gone back and

Re: [boost] Formal Review Requst: String Algorithm Library

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeff, Jeff Garland wrote: |>Phil, |> |>On Monday 03 March 2003 23:28, Phil Nash wrote: |> |>>This request seems to have been left up in the air. I know that many are |>>busy with the release schedule, and there is an identified shortage of |>>review ma

Re: [boost] SourceForge computer farm

At 08:55 PM 3/2/2003, Daryle Walker wrote: >When I read a web page for a project (in this case, HTML-Tidy at >), I noticed that they built/tested their >library every day automatically with computers SourceForge leaves for >automation. Maybe we should use those comput

Re: [boost] Proposal: strings as template parameters?

At 12:23 PM 3/2/2003, Jason House wrote: > >I believe I've seen traffic earlier about some kind of upcoming deadline >for proposals for becoming part of the C++ standard. There was a deadline yesterday (3 March) for papers to go in the pre-meeting mailing, and there is another in April for final p

RE: [boost] Formal Review Requst: String Algorithm Library

> Phil, > > On Monday 03 March 2003 23:28, Phil Nash wrote: > > This request seems to have been left up in the air. I know that many are > > busy with the release schedule, and there is an identified shortage of > > review managers, but it would have been nice to have at least acknowledged > > th

Re: [boost] Formal Review Requst: String Algorithm Library

[Thomas Witt] > Pavols request is already in the queue. This has been done off list. Ok, great - thanks for that. [)o IhIL.. ___ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

I'm interested in something like this, but I am not sure if your implementation meets the needs I often seem to have. 1. I very often am given a raw buffer by pointer and wish to acquire it into a more RAII-like container without copying. 2. Also I would like to provide a customer deleter. Obviou

Re: [boost] Does this compiler need configuring?

> I'm trying to use the more_io.zip stuff currently under review with a > copy of Metrowerks CodeWarrior Developement Studio (Mac OS X Edition, > v8). I haven't got anything to compile. I get errors like: Based on the errors it looks to me like the compiler is being detected as MSVC ? ! John.

Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

> I have not tried to figure out where that increase comes from, but the > usual suspecs are regex, function and signal since that is what we use > most. It shouldn't be regex: there have been a couple of minor patches and a reorganization of the header directory structure, but no significant chan

[boost] Singleton class

hi , Do we have singleton class? if we dont have that and think to have it - i'd designed one simple _singleton<> that works good to make parameter class singleton.. regards, Pintoo. ___ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/lis

[boost] Any Interest In a Raw Memory Buffer

Is there any interest in a vector like container which is designed to make working with raw memory easy. It is different from a vector (with the additional assumption that the objects are stored in memory sequentially) is the following ways: The integrator is defined to be a pointer to make