Hi Doug,
>> Will I be able to write:
>>
>>any a;
>>values[10] = a;
>>
>> ?
>> IOW, I don't think your proposal provides any means to convert between
>> 'any' with different allocators. And I'm not sure you can easily achieve
>> that
>
> Sure you can. You just store a copy of the alloc
I am using Boost Ver 1.30 just released. I built the
libraries with BJam. Now when building my code I get lots of warnings like the
following. These warnings worry me a bit because they are level 1 and 2
warnings. Is it “safe” to ignore these or do I need to manually set
some option? I neve
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Edward Diener wrote:
> Do you really want the key to an associative container to be an optional
> value ? I would be hard-pressed to find a use for that.
FWIW, the Signals library actually does this internally (although with
boost::any objects instead of boost::optional objec
Do you really want the key to an associative container to be an optional
value ? I would be hard-pressed to find a use for that.
Joe Gottman wrote:
>It would be nice if boost::optional had operator< defined
> whenever operator< was defined for T. This would allow us to use
> optional as the
Replying to myself sorry...
> Quite right. This was related to the QueryPerformanceCounter() using the
> 8254-compatible real-time clock which could take several thousand cycles.
> The HAL of Pentium's and above should use Intel's RDTSC (Read Time Stamp
> Counter) and not suffer this problem.
Ap
It would be nice if boost::optional had operator< defined whenever
operator< was defined for T. This would allow us to use optional as the
key of an associative container. I suggest the following semantics:
bool operator<(optional const &x, optional const &y);
Returns: If y is uninitialize
At 05:47 PM 3/24/2003, Lapshin, Kirill wrote:
>>> The interesting part that it fails to compile even when there is no
>>> instantiation of the template.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In random library this assertion is within #ifndef
>>> BOOST_NO_LIMITS_COMPILE_TIME_CONSTANTS #endif directives.
>
>>That makes n
"Lapshin, Kirill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> The interesting part that it fails to compile even when there is no
>>> instantiation of the template.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In random library this assertion is within #ifndef
>>> BOOST_NO_LIMITS_COMPILE_TIME_CONSTANTS #endif directives.
>
>>That makes
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas Becker
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 7:50 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [boost] Determining interest in combining_iterator
>
> This email is to determine possible interest in a
> submission
> Even a simple overloading of two functions (if we don't want to
> disturb reference binding) seems to put it in serious trouble:
>
>
> void f(int) { something... }
> void f(short) { something else... }
>
> int main() {
> int i = 0;
> f(i);
> }
int and short do not have an
John Harris (TT) wrote:
> In the 1.30.0 release, the docs for BOOST_PP_IF and BOOST_PP_IIF
> incorrectly refer to 'expr'. It looks as though they were copied
> from EXPR_IIF.
>
> john harris
> trading technologies
Thanks John, I'll fix it.
Paul Mensonides
__
> -Original Message-
> On Behalf Of Beman Dawes
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 March 2003 1:15 AM
> Be careful. At least with some older versions of Windows, the execution
> time for some of the Windows time related API's was so large that the
> useful resolution was nowhere near the apparent clai
>> The interesting part that it fails to compile even when there is no
>> instantiation of the template.
>>
>>
>>
>> In random library this assertion is within #ifndef
>> BOOST_NO_LIMITS_COMPILE_TIME_CONSTANTS #endif directives.
>That makes no sense. That macro is defined for msvc6 IIRC.
No it
> I added that to Boost.Python, FWIW.
Date/Time and Test have it also.
Gennadiy.
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
"Lapshin, Kirill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The interesting part that it fails to compile even when there is no
> instantiation of the template.
>
>
>
> In random library this assertion is within #ifndef
> BOOST_NO_LIMITS_COMPILE_TIME_CONSTANTS #endif directives.
That makes no sense. That
Hi All,
I was reporting recently that random does not compile on msvc
6; I've seen another report on the list that it does not work on intel c
7 as well.
The fact that released random library fails to work on these
very popular compilers is rather sad. I did some investigation and nail
Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Feedback on the idea or implementation welcome. This code, at the moment,
> does not follow boost standards. If people think it is a worthy addition
> to boost I will be willing to being it up to boost standards. But for
> right now please refrain
Beman Dawes wrote:
> But here is the surprise - when I ran the same test on a 2.0 giga-Hertz
> Pentium 4, running Win2K SP2, it took around 4.5 seconds. See below.
I was surprised at the difference too, so tested here with a Dual 800Mhz
PIII (Dell Precision 220) running Windows 2000 Advanced Serv
"Edward Diener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> In many ways the preparation Boost 1.30.0 went very well, and the
>> resulting release seems very high quality to me.
>>
>> There were rough edges of course, and we'll try to make some
>> improvements
>> in coming months. Mostly j
"Alisdair Meredith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Russell Hind wrote:
>
> WinAPI Note: we can get a higher resolution using the
> QueryPerformanceCounter API (and QueryPerformanceFrequency if resolution
> info is required)
>
It is (was) not completely reliable: see
[2003-03-24] Beman Dawes wrote:
>There was some discussion of a better tracking system once before, but I
>really think we need to get going on this now. The problems are much more
>serious.
>
>What systems work for others in an Internet environment like Boost? Who
>could act as host? I see the
- Original Message -
From: "Fernando Cacciola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Following snippet of code fails:
> > -
> > #include
> > #include
> >
> > void foo(const boost::optional >& aux =
> > boost::optional >())
> > {}
> >
> > int main() {}
> > -
[snip]
>
Russell Hind wrote:
>I've just run this quickly on my PIII 800 running Win2K SP3 and worse
>case for 1,000,000 calls to QueryPerformanceCounter was 1.92seconds,
>usually between 1.55 and 1.65 seconds (10 runs).
I tied it on a 1.8 giga-hertz Pentium 4M, running XP Pro, with very similar
results:
Beman Dawes wrote:
> In many ways the preparation Boost 1.30.0 went very well, and the
> resulting release seems very high quality to me.
>
> There were rough edges of course, and we'll try to make some
> improvements
> in coming months. Mostly just procedural stuff like making sure we
> have an ac
Russell Hind wrote:
> Another group in our company uses BugZilla for an internal project, and
> I helped them out on it for a few months, and so had access to it. I
> liked it. Specifically:
We use BugZilla internally too, and I would describe it as 'rudimentary,
but adequate'. OTOH, we have n
Thanks, I've learnt some history of C++ :-) The dates in your document
also allowed me to locate a relevant WP. For those interested:
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/wp/pdf/jan94/body.pdf
As it appears, the specification of the standard exception classes
underwent major changes in tha
Beman Dawes wrote:
What systems work for others in an Internet environment like Boost? Who
could act as host? I see the GCC folks are migrating from GNATS to
Bugzilla.
Another group in our company uses BugZilla for an internal project, and
I helped them out on it for a few months, and so had
David Abrahams wrote:
> > But I think the above set of operation is quite handy when one wants to
> > create a new input iterator. The wrapped class is also close to
> > Generator, with added 'eof' method. So, I wonder, if I should strive to
> > make something reusable, which can be added to the l
Beman Dawes said:
> There was some discussion of a better tracking system once before, but I
> really think we need to get going on this now. The problems are much
> more serious.
>
> What systems work for others in an Internet environment like Boost? Who
> could act as host? I see the GCC folks
Russell Hind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Line 56 of optional.hpp states that Borland ICEs if the union is
> un-named. This is correct for C++Builder 5 (0x551), but C++Builder 6
> Update 4 (0x564) doesn't have this problem.
>
> Not worth removing it but just thoug
Vladimir Prus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a simple class, which three interesting
> methods:
> - current
> - advance
> - eof
>
> I had a custom wrapper which converts any class which such methods (and some
> typedefs) and now I want to use iterator adaptors library. What is the best
> a
The following message seems to be written at an 'untime', because nobody
responded, especially nobody of the maintainers. Nevertheless IMHO this
question is worth thinking about to find a resolution.
> Hi all,
>
> I have a problem while using the iterator_adaptor templates
> in conjunction with
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:03:10 +0100, Gennaro Prota
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Maybe you can also add an exclamation point
Ahem, exclamation mark :-)
Genny.
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Gennaro Prota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 13:26:04 -0500, David Abrahams
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>That sounds right. Would you like to post a proposed replacement (or
>>patch) for the page as written which addresses your points?
>
> You embarrass me.
Unintended.
>
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 07:24:38 -0500, David Abrahams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I don't think I've ever read a
>description of LSP which doesn't leave that question completely
>unaddressed.
I've never seen a formulation of LSP which was appliable to C++.
"If for each object o1 of type S there i
I have a simple class, which three interesting
methods:
- current
- advance
- eof
I had a custom wrapper which converts any class which such methods (and some
typedefs) and now I want to use iterator adaptors library. What is the best
approach? I can roll a new policy class, of course.
But I
In many ways the preparation Boost 1.30.0 went very well, and the resulting
release seems very high quality to me.
There were rough edges of course, and we'll try to make some improvements
in coming months. Mostly just procedural stuff like making sure we have an
active maintainer for all libra
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 13:26:04 -0500, David Abrahams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That sounds right. Would you like to post a proposed replacement (or
>patch) for the page as written which addresses your points?
You embarrass me. I think the page is ok as long as you don't say
"during" stack unwind
"Neal D. Becker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to learn about boostbook. Where can I find some info? Are there
> dtd's I can get?
Have you seen
http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Boost_Documentation_Format
??
--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-co
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Neal D. Becker wrote:
> I'd like to learn about boostbook. Where can I find some info? Are there
> dtd's I can get?
All of the BoostBook sources (DTD, XSL stylesheets, docs, etc.) are in
Boost CVS under tools/boostbook.
There's an HTML version of the BoostBook documentation
Thanks for the answer.
So, it seems that the boost.thread has to be a dll.
I've done as Dave suggested: bjam -d2 so I could made all the settings for
the dll-project
like they are done by you.
Still some problems:
1) You are using the /MD (/MDd) flag for the "Runtime Library". This is a
problem
Thomas Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The combining iterator is another iterator adaptor. It
> holds a boost::tuple of iterators. Moving the
> combining iterator in any way causes all member
> iterators of the tuple to move in parallel. Upon
> dereferencing the combining iterator, the derefe
I'd like to learn about boostbook. Where can I find some info? Are there
dtd's I can get?
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Do you want the C++Builder project as well, or is this enough?
Cheers
Russell
Beman Dawes wrote:
Interesting. Could you please post the entire program as an attachment,
so I can just compile and run it without any cut-and-paste?
Thanks,
--Beman
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char* ar
Russell Hind wrote:
>Does this help?
>
>I've just run this quickly on my PIII 800 running Win2K SP3 and worse
>case for 1,000,000 calls to QueryPerformanceCounter was 1.92seconds,
>usually between 1.55 and 1.65 seconds (10 runs).
>
>LARGE_INTEGER Start, End, Temp;
> QueryPerformanceCounter(&S
Beman Dawes wrote:
Be careful. At least with some older versions of Windows, the execution
time for some of the Windows time related API's was so large that the
useful resolution was nowhere near the apparent claimed resolution.
If a function that is supposed to measure time in microseconds take
I'd like to request that the Visual C++ 7.0 with STLport become a supported
configuration for the regex library. Visual C++ 6.0 with STLport is already
a supported configuration. I get the feeling many people were only using
STLport with vc6 because the bundled STL was broken, and they switched t
Title: John Stationery
In the 1.30.0 release, the docs
for BOOST_PP_IF and BOOST_PP_IIF incorrectly refer to 'expr'. It looks as
though they were copied from EXPR_IIF.
john harris
trading
technologies
At 08:04 AM 3/24/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>Russell Hind wrote:
>
>> I agree with that. Would it be better to make it a millisec_clock, or
>> just use the microsec_clock but the resolution is only milliseconds?
>
>WinAPI Note: we can get a higher resolution using the
>QueryPerformanceCounter
Line 56 of optional.hpp states that Borland ICEs if the union is
un-named. This is correct for C++Builder 5 (0x551), but C++Builder 6
Update 4 (0x564) doesn't have this problem.
Not worth removing it but just thought I'd point it out incase anyone is
interested.
Cheers
Russell
_
> The combining iterator is another iterator adaptor. It
> holds a boost::tuple of iterators. Moving the
> combining iterator in any way causes all member
> iterators of the tuple to move in parallel. Upon
> dereferencing the combining iterator, the dereferenced
> values of the member iterators are
Russell Hind wrote:
> Can these be used to get an actual date/time though? Or just for high
> resolution timing? I've only had a brief look at them, so will read a
> bit more.
Oops, good point!!
--
AlisdairM
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Say, I have
>
>std::map values;
>
> Will I be able to write:
>
>any a;
>values[10] = a;
>
> ?
> IOW, I don't think your proposal provides any means to convert between 'any'
> with different allocators. And I'm not sure you can easily achieve t
Alisdair Meredith wrote:
Russell Hind wrote:
I agree with that. Would it be better to make it a millisec_clock, or
just use the microsec_clock but the resolution is only milliseconds?
WinAPI Note: we can get a higher resolution using the
QueryPerformanceCounter API (and QueryPerformanceFrequen
Darren Cook wrote:
I'm using new/delete currently, but was planning to use boost.Pool once my
design has settled down.
I was considering using some sort of pooling/block allocation method to
improve allocation efficiency, but was leaving that as an optimization
consideration for when I got the
Boosters,
The update of lexical_cast caused quite a few headaches before the release
of 1.30.0. Rather than reiterating the reasons for squeezing the update into
1.30.0, I just want to thank the people involved for their efforts, and
apologize to all for the problems due to these last-minute chang
Russell Hind wrote:
> I agree with that. Would it be better to make it a millisec_clock, or
> just use the microsec_clock but the resolution is only milliseconds?
WinAPI Note: we can get a higher resolution using the
QueryPerformanceCounter API (and QueryPerformanceFrequency if resolution
info i
> > I think this is a good addition, but we should probably make the
> > addition for all Win32 compilers since I think this is actually
> > part of the Win32 api.
> >
>
> I agree with that. Would it be better to make it a millisec_clock, or
> just use the microsec_clock but the resolution is o
Jon Wray wrote:
> Thanks! I noticed that this change leads to different behavior when
> assigning rules. Consider this code:
>
> typename rule_::type Identifier;
> typename rule_::type Function;
> typename rule_::type Predicate;
> typename rule_::type Variable;
>
> Identifier = lexeme
Thomas Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I recently noticed that the ready-to-use boost now provide almost
> everything that we use, with the exception of the combining
> iterator. But this is a very important one for us, hence the
> proposed submission.
>
> Please comment.
It's a wonderful i
Jeff Garland wrote:
C++Builder doesn't currently support the microsec_clock of date_time
because of its standard library. Would it be possible to add code to
get the time using Win32 methods as this gives millisecond times?
I think this is a good addition, but we should probably make the
addi
> I read on the date_time change history about a new function for
> calculating ISO 8601 week number.
>
> I should note that this week number is rather useless without
> the corresponding year number. ISO 8601 week-based year is not
> always the same as the actual year. For example, 2nd January 19
Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Cut&paste from your second post:]
> > I'm even inclined to do as other projects do and kill all the
> > underscores, waiting to deal with ambiguity until it arises. It's
> > going to be a *long* time before we have numbers that could conflict.
>
> Sho
/*
Pavel Vozenilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I use Borland C++ Builder 6, update 4, STLPort 4.5.1 (provided by Borland)
> and Boost is 1.30.0beta1.
>
Sorry for the delay...
> Following snippet of code fails:
>
> -
> #include
> #include
>
> voi
> C++Builder doesn't currently support the microsec_clock of date_time
> because of its standard library. Would it be possible to add code to
> get the time using Win32 methods as this gives millisecond times?
I think this is a good addition, but we should probably make the
addition for all Wi
Dave Gomboc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Since you advocate elsewhere that exception classes be derived
>> > from std::exception, the answer is because otherwise LSP would
>> > be violated.
>>
>> You can't access the derived class' assignment operator through a
>> pointer/reference to a polym
This email is to determine possible interest in a
submission to boost: the combining iterator.
Short Description
=
The combining iterator is another iterator adaptor. It
holds a boost::tuple of iterators. Moving the
combining iterator in any way causes all member
iterators of the t
Given that the accuracy of Windows GetLocalTime (and GetSystemTime) is
milliseconds, perhaps a millisec_clock would be better that putting this
in the microsec_clock? It would possibly make more sense
Cheers
Russell
Russell Hind wrote:
C++Builder doesn't currently support the microsec_clock o
C++Builder doesn't currently support the microsec_clock of date_time
because of its standard library. Would it be possible to add code to
get the time using Win32 methods as this gives millisecond times?
Something like this in microsec_time_clock.hpp seems to work
static time_type local_ti
David Abrahams wrote:
Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
And I'd prefer to have a
separator for the non-releases like the '-' anywhere:
v1_30-branch
v1_30_0-rc1
v1_30_0
v1_30_1-rc1
v1_30_1-rc2
v1_30_1
Why?
Nothing technical / serious. Just my personal taste, yours may vary :)
Anything with
70 matches
Mail list logo
