[boost] Re: 1.31.0 release schedule

2003-08-29 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Anthony Williams wrote: Will the variant library be part of 1.31.0? Apparently so: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/boost/boost/index.htm Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman

[boost] Re: what happened to allocators in boost?

2003-08-26 Thread Dirk Gerrits
/library_technical_report.html Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: Interest in FC++?

2003-06-26 Thread Dirk Gerrits
! Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: Interest in FC++?

2003-06-26 Thread Dirk Gerrits
. I'm not sure what the official Boost policy is, but the regex lib uses a considerable amount of 'camel hump notation' as well. Perhaps you won't have to change that many names after all. ;) Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http

[boost] Re: Bidirectionnal map

2003-03-12 Thread Dirk Gerrits
number of keys and values, if I recall correctly. Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: Meta programming 'debug' mode.

2003-03-11 Thread Dirk Gerrits
and report back in a few days. Nice :-) Indeed. :) Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: Meta programming 'debug' mode.

2003-03-11 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Gennaro Prota wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:46:17 +0100, Dirk Gerrits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps I missed a part of the discussion, but what is wrong with Jaap's suggestion: #ifdef BOOST_STATIC_NDEBUG #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT( B ) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_IMPL( true ) #else #define

[boost] Re: Meta programming 'debug' mode.

2003-03-10 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Jaap Suter wrote: [snip] #ifdef BOOST_STATIC_NDEBUG #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT( B ) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_IMPL( true ) #else #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT( B ) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_IMPL( B ) #endif Yes much better. I don't see any problems with this, does anyone? Regards, Dirk Gerrits

[boost] Re: Meta programming 'debug' mode.

2003-03-09 Thread Dirk Gerrits
::value, true_ ::type::value )); 3. Other ideas? I'd say something like: #ifdef STATIC_NDEBUG #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT2(e) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT(e) #else #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT2(e) (void(e)) #endif Analogous to cassert. Regards, Dirk Gerrits

[boost] Re: Meta programming 'debug' mode.

2003-03-09 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Dirk Gerrits wrote: Jaap Suter wrote: Hi, In my own meta-programming I tend to use a lot of static_asserts and concept checks. However, these do have a negative impact on my compile-times. Take, for example, a meta-function that takes a type-list as its parameter. Assume a pre-condition

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

2003-03-03 Thread Dirk Gerrits
with the Boost Preprocessor library? That'd make this a whole lot more convenient to use. Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

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

2003-03-02 Thread Dirk Gerrits
parameters don't really work all that well, if I recall correctly. Then again, I might be wrong. Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: container algorithms almost complete

2003-03-02 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Dirk Gerrits wrote: Thorsten Ottosen wrote: I see your point. Does anyone have a nice idea of how to detect when the template argument is an iterator? It's easy with pairs and arrays and the default case is containers. Perhaps you can use Boost's concept check to see if the template argument

[boost] Re: How to convert a template parameter into a string

2003-02-28 Thread Dirk Gerrits
if it's such a huge advantage over: template typename T void foo(T) { cout T is typeid(T).name() endl; } The resulting string of your method is more portable of course, but is that the only reason? Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes

[boost] Re: How to convert a template parameter into a string

2003-02-28 Thread Dirk Gerrits
of T makes my proposal better than typeid(). At what cost? The strings you generate are indeed very readable, but specializing spelling for every type that might be a template parameter someday seems like too much of a burden to me. Others might disagree though... Dirk Gerrits

[boost] Re: intrusive tagging allows omision of unneeded headers

2003-01-09 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Thorsten Ottosen wrote: - Original Message - From: Dirk Gerrits [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Boost mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 6:15 PM Subject: [boost] Re: intrusive tagging allows omision of unneeded headers Thorsten Ottosen wrote: [snip] class X

[boost] Re: bidirectional pointer proposal

2003-01-08 Thread Dirk Gerrits
of a better way. ;) - what should operator- or * do when there is no peer attached ? Nothing. You could assert that the peer pointer is not null, but don't do anything about it. IMHO. Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http

[boost] Re: intrusive tagging allows omision of unneeded headers

2003-01-08 Thread Dirk Gerrits
? Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: notation question

2003-01-08 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Dirk Gerrits wrote: Vladimir Prus wrote: David Abrahams wrote: Vladimir Prus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd prefer the latter variant, so that non-broken platforms use more natural syntax. Another question is whether we could use only the second version. Theoretically, if you call

[boost] Re: Formal review: Optional library

2002-12-10 Thread Dirk Gerrits
(). :-) Well at least it showed me the difference between acquire() and release(). ;) Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: Formal review: Optional library

2002-12-09 Thread Dirk Gerrits
manage to make the idiom known enough, the user will know that he can't delete the pointer and that the pointer can be used only as long as the 'source' (the optional object in this case) remains alive. I still don't see the difference between peek/acquire and get/release. Care to enlighten me? Dirk

[boost] int vs int32_t [was: Serialiization Review repost with consistentquoting]

2002-11-26 Thread Dirk Gerrits
outweigh the disadvantages. But perhaps I'm missing something? Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: Serialization Library Review

2002-11-23 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Thomas Matelich wrote: Dirk Gerrits wrote in message ar37hg$6hm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:ar37hg$6hm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Thomas Matelich wrote: Anyway, seemed like a nice package for general use. My company is currently in love with XML, so I probably wouldn't be using it for our co

[boost] Re: Formal Review Request: class optional

2002-11-22 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Fernando Cacciola wrote: Dirk Gerrits wrote in message arjgo5$o25$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:arjgo5$o25$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Fernando Cacciola wrote: [snip] void recieve_async_message() { optional rcv ; while ( !!(rcv = get_async_input()) !timeout() ) output(*rcv); } [snip

[boost] Re: Formal Review Request: class optional

2002-11-22 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Fernando Cacciola wrote: - Original Message - From: Dirk Gerrits To: Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:36 PM Subject: [boost] Re: Formal Review Request: class optional [snipped] I guess I'd use if (peek(opt) != 0) or something. It's not that !! is so ugly, but it's not very clear

[boost] Re: Formal Review Request: class optional

2002-11-21 Thread Dirk Gerrits
libraries? (smart_ptr to name one.) Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[boost] Re: minor scoped_ptr/scoped_array feature request

2002-11-18 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Thorsten Ottosen wrote: Since I'm not English, how should I read wink? I hope this answers your question: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=wink Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi

[boost] Re: Named Template Parameters implementation

2002-11-18 Thread Dirk Gerrits
? Well AFAIK it has never been required that Boost libraries support 'backwards' compilers. ISO/IEC 14882 compliant code would be acceptable. However, for usability, I agree that it is in everybody's best interest to support as many compilers as possible, which is what most Boost libraries do. Dirk

[boost] Re: MPL lambda

2002-11-15 Thread Dirk Gerrits
a scattered hierarchy instead of a linear one. Regards, Dirk Gerrits ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Re: MPL lambda

2002-11-15 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Mat Marcus wrote: Scatter hierarchies can be achieved by using inherit_linearly together with mpl::inherit. See the second example that Aleksey cited *is* an example of a scatter hierarchy. Forgive me, I hadn't realized this. That's just too cool! :) Thanks. Regards, Dirk Gerrits

[boost] Re: In the Spirit of Challenge

2002-11-08 Thread Dirk Gerrits
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Paul Mensonides wrote in message news:001601c286c9$64eedf40$6401a8c0;c161550b... [about a C++ preprocessor] This one I'd like to see, but it might be too easy. There isn't much to Cpp. Explain this to the MSVC and MWCW folks. They both got it wrong. That's the