On Wednesday, June 18, 2003, at 9:59 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
Daryle Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point was that warnings are non-portable constructions made up
by compiler makers.
So are the semantics of #include. That doesn't mean we can't count
on certain similarities (though they
On Thursday, June 19, 2003, at 10:29 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
[SNIP]
Because the platform is apparently so similar to POSIX and/or Windows,
I'd prefer not to treat it as a distinct platform. Rather, I'd like to
treat BOOST_NETWARE as a variation on BOOST_POSIX and/or BOOST_WINDOWS.
[TRUNCATE]
Beman Dawes wrote:
Reading the patch, I see one or two specific differences from POSIX or
Windows, but basically operational functions are treaded as if on a POSIX
platform, while paths are treated as if on Windows.
Does that mean the Windows API is not available? Or was there some other
John Torjo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
I was just thinking (actually, I needed this, while doing some coding),
that
STATIC_ASSERT could get a little of the SMART_ASSERT flavour.
What am I talking about?
In case a STATIC_ASSERT fails, how about dumping
Below is a copy of my post to comp.lang.c++.moderated
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=author:alnsn-mycop%40yandex.ruhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=3eef18d6%40news.fhg.dernum=1
--- cut ---
Thomas Hansen wrote:
BTW!
Serialization of objects in C++ or any other language for that reason
is one of the
Oops, sorry
That was intended as a private e-mail to Aleksey.
My apologies to Peter.
Misha Bergal
MetaCommunications Engineering
___
Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
However, it seems to be confused by the preprocessor library.
Since the
includes sometime have the form:
#include BOOST_PP_ITERATE()
the 'bcp' tool does not find them. For example,
boost/preprocessor/iteration/detail/iter directory is needed by
boost/function.hpp but
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 00:49:42 -0400, Daryle Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wednesday, June 18, 2003, at 9:59 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
Slightly. They are still non-portable constructions made up by
compiler makers.
As I understand it, the #include directive dumps the contents of a file
However, it seems to be confused by the preprocessor library. Since the
includes sometime have the form:
#include BOOST_PP_ITERATE()
the 'bcp' tool does not find them. For example,
boost/preprocessor/iteration/detail/iter directory is needed by
boost/function.hpp but is not included.
Anyone got a Win32 exe of bcp that they could email me?
Eventually there probably will be one to download, but it's still developing
quite rapidly at present, I'll mail you a binary build though.
John.
___
Unsubscribe other changes:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neal D. Becker Jun 19 2003 3:32PM
If you are starting out, why not use current cygwin?
Do you mean why not use GCC (3.2)?
Because 3.2 is buggy and I can't use it with my software. And it would
take me quite some time to download it on my slow
John Maddock wrote:
Here is the (main) code, which uses Wave to output the file
names of
all successfully opened include files (this needs some filtering to
avoid double output of the same file):
Interesting, the thing is I need the code to find all
possible dependencies, so that
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Aleksey (and all),
In working on porting boost::variant to Borland, I've come across some
trouble with a bug in the compiler.
Specfically, I'm getting Cannot have both a template class and
function named 'bind1st' and similarly for bind2nd. I know
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Augustus Saunders wrote:
PS I'd like to hear more views on this -
previous review comments were quite different,
being very cautious about an 'advanced' scheme like this.
I didn't react to this review at first because I was a bit disappointed by
the content of the
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Hagan
| Sent: 20 June 2003 11:27
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: [boost] Re: Re: Math Constants Formal Review -
| using namespacestoselectfloat size is simpler?
|
| Paul A Bristow
Quoting David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Neal D. Becker Jun 19 2003 3:32PM
If you are starting out, why not use current cygwin?
Do you mean why not use GCC (3.2)?
Because 3.2 is buggy and I can't use it with my software. And it
would take me quite some time to download it on my
At 08:49 AM 6/15/2003, John Maddock wrote:
I've been working on an automated tool to extract and present a list of
boost licences in effect for a given boost library (or collection of
files).
Although the tool is working well, it's throwing up a lot of licences
that
are used by just one or two
It may helpful to those unfamiliar to the Boost Interval library
to see some exactly representable values of pi
(from test_pi_interval.cpp)
// Float 24 bit significand, 32 bit float
// static const float pi_f_l = 13176794.0f/(1 22);
// static const float
So there seems to be some interest at least from a couple of people.
To further clarify what I have, here is a piece of code using my msg buffer
class to do a few different things and also, a snippet of the public part of
my class definition.
At one point there were functions which allowed data
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:51:31 +0100, Paul A Bristow
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Well, you wanted to know what is likely to be accepted. In a
| formal review (this isn't anymore, AFAIU, is it?) I would
| vote no to your approach.
But would you vote yes if the only presentation was Daniel's
Douglas Gregor wrote:
Creating new visitors in the BGL can be a pain, because it may require a
lot of extra typing for simple cases. I'd like to add the ability to attach
function objects to visitor events like this:
dfs_visitor()
.do_on_back_edge(var(has_cycle) = true)
I have a few comments regarding the tokenizer library.
1. The documentation says that char_delimiters_separator is default parameter
to 'tokenizer' template, and at the same time says that
'char_delimiters_separator' is deprecated. I think that's confusing and
default parameter should be
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Paul A Bristow wrote:
[snip]
| [*] It is not even true. Due to double rounding troubles,
| using a higher precision can lead to a value that is not the
| nearest number.
Is this true even when you have a few more digits than necessary?
Kahan's article suggested to
Hi,
I have no comment about the tokenize library, but if your are interested
in the stuff like that, you can have a look into the sandbox.
string_algo library already contains this functionality
( along with other interesting features ) and it is implemented in more generic way.
Documentation
Vladimir Prus wrote:
1. The documentation says that char_delimiters_separator is default parameter
to 'tokenizer' template, and at the same time says that
'char_delimiters_separator' is deprecated. I think that's confusing and
default parameter should be changed to 'char-separator'.
I was
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:30:48 +0200 (CEST), Guillaume Melquiond
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Paul A Bristow wrote:
[snip]
| [*] It is not even true. Due to double rounding troubles,
| using a higher precision can lead to a value that is not the
| nearest number.
Is this
Hi All!
I hereby request a formal review of the Numeric Conversions library,
which can be found here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/numeric_conversions.zip
Here's an except of the 'Overview' documentation section:
--
The Boost Numeric
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Gennaro Prota wrote:
| [*] It is not even true. Due to double rounding troubles,
| using a higher precision can lead to a value that is not the
| nearest number.
Is this true even when you have a few more digits than necessary?
Kahan's article suggested to me
John Maddock wrote:
Another note is on usability. Say I create directory po and find that
some
files are missing. I tweak bcp source and try again. But attempt to
override
files fail. I remove po directory. But then bcp says the destination
does
not exist. It's a bit inconvenient ---
Pavol Droba wrote:
Hi,
I have no comment about the tokenize library, but if your are interested
in the stuff like that, you can have a look into the sandbox.
string_algo library already contains this functionality
( along with other interesting features ) and it is implemented in more
Bruce Barr wrote:
Here's a patch to depth_first_search.hpp in BGL in version 1.30.0 of boost
that implements nonrecursive depth first search. This reduces or
eliminates the problem of stack overflow that occurs with DFS in large
graphs. There also may be a performance gain in some cases.
31 matches
Mail list logo
