Joaquín Mª López Muñoz wrote:
Hi Fernando,
[snip...]
Besides, no one except you seems to be interested in multiindex_type :(
If only some boosters jump into this discussion I'm sure many interesting
insights would be provided.
I'm interested in this discussion but generally keep my mouth shut
Brian McNamara wrote:
I would like to see if there is interest in incorporating the FC++
library into Boost.
I had no clue what FC++ was, but hunted down some information on it.
It seems pretty cool... Being new, I'll hope for lots of reuse of
other boost features, and quality
as precision, an integer number of decimal
places would probably be easier from the implementation standpoint.
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
| Well, *practical* can mean a number of things to different people.
| Maybe performance constraints should
Vladimir Prus wrote:
Does those alternate streams belong to filesystem library at all?
For one thing, the ':' symbols is not allowed anywhere except for root name.
For another thing, on all systems but NTFS, bar.baz.blip:blat would be
considered as having blip:blat extension, and making the
:blat ???
1. I have no clue what that would mean
2. Is there any handling of :blat in any way shape or form in the file
system stuff? I don't remember seeing any description of that case...
Carl Daniel wrote:
James Curran wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
The intent is to get/change the part
Larry Evans wrote:
Reece Dunn wrote:
Here is the associated code and example program.
Wouldn't the following:
*thisiomanip::setw(m_indent.length * m_indent.level)setfill(fill)fill;
*thissetfill(fill);
do essentially what indentor OutputFileType ::indent() does?
I have not
Terje Slettebø wrote:
From: Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had 2 thoughts today...
1. Is it at all useful/possible to use a lambda-like notation?
In what way? Could you have given a rough syntax-example?
An example in BLL is:
std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), std::cout _1
I had 2 thoughts today...
1. Is it at all useful/possible to use a lambda-like notation?
In the past, I've liked the look of that a lot.
(the comments about alternate notation made me think of it)
2. Why are we restricting the output to strings?
Couldn't the types of the 3 delimiter
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz wrote:
1. Syntax and semantics
Since bimap follows as closely as possible the interface of std::map,
there's little IMHO to add or remove from here. The added constraint
of bidirectionality imposes some behavior that diverges from regular
maps, though. I don't think
Terje Slettebø wrote:
typedef std::vectorchar vector_char;
vector_char values;
// Fill with 'A', 'B', 'C'
std::cout io::formatvector_char([, ], , , \', \') values;
Output:
['A', 'B', 'C']
However, is this overkill?
It seems that way, especially considering that if it was
Daniel Frey wrote:
I'd also be interested in a 'set' of 'tuples' with a user-defined set of
'views', where a view has its own sort-criterion and its own iterators,
find-functions, etc. At least this is what I imagine but I haven't
worked on it, so I don't know whether it's a realistic
James Curran wrote:
Jason House wrote:
Another quesion:
if
template const char *S SomeClass { ...};
extern const char* MyParam_1 = MyParam;
extern const char* MyParam_2 = MyParam;
then would
typeof(SomeClassMyParam_1) == typeof(SomeClassMyParam_2)
be true?
I guess
Dirk Gerrits wrote:
Jason House wrote:
I'm thinking that it would be nice to be able to us define distinct
types based on strings (the fundamental type const char * and not
std::string). The intended use is in templates.
Well I'm just curious how you would like to accomplish
I took a quick look at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/static_string.zip
Basically it treats static string kind of like a tuple of all
characters?
That seems like a reasonable implementation. (As basic idea, I have
not truly reviewed it). Of course, language support for making
I believe I've seen traffic earlier about some kind of upcoming deadline
for proposals for becoming part of the C++ standard.
I'm thinking that it would be nice to be able to us define distinct
types based on strings (the fundamental type const char * and not
std::string). The intended use is
Kevin Atkinson wrote:
Is there any interest in a fixed point math library.
Well, I'm interested in a fixed point library :)
Especially if it can be used as a template argument in place of a
floating point type.
Using templates the
compiler can keep track of the radix point for you
Kevin Atkinson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Jason House wrote:
One thought... It looks like the template parameter should be an integer
type (of course, right?)... I think that there is some way to cause a
non integer type to generate a compiler error. Of course, considering
other
managed_copy?
How about an abbreviated name?
Like rsrc_mgr? Although, I don't like that abbreviation for resource...
___
Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Terje Slettebø wrote:
From: Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would suspect that chars don't get output with '' around them...
Right. I was just thinking C++ code, here. :)
Is there even a way to specify/change that?
It isn't currently, as the fundamental types aren't handled
Terje Slettebø wrote:
From: Vladimir Prus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry for having taken so long to respond to these messages. I felt a need
for a break, to consider how it might be done.
I was wondering about this line of discussion earlier today... wondering
if it died on the vine or not.
Well, being relatively a newbie at all this stuff, I have to admit
that the initial discussion of performing a lock using a (smart)
pointer, seemed odd to me. Someone later clarified that a smart
pointer doesn't need to use * and - operators... something very
non-pointer-like to me...
* The
or a UDP socket...
Brian Gray wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 12:08 PM, Jason House wrote:
* How easy will support for SCTP be to work into the boost socket
library? ... and how easy would the interface be to use?
I looked at the docs on www.sctp.de and downloaded the source
supported SCTP, would that meet your requirements?
Jason House
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: cc:
boost-bounces@list Subject: [boost] Re: Sockets
Once I heard there was a generic socket library in development, I thought I'd add
a quick feature request. I would like to see the ability to have multiple
streams through the same socket.
Having had recent issues with a game and a proxy/firewall, I thought that I might
try and see if I can do
Vladimir Prus wrote:
I'm pulling at stings, but there has to be good stuff to add if we come up
with
the right aspect to develop. I have never heard of a library designed for
evaluation of debug-time expressions... It would be interesting to see
how
powerful of a compile-time
Terje Slettebø wrote:
Regarding this project. I've got doubts about the viability of it.
Well, I'm glad you've given it a greater level of thought. I really like the idea
of the composite_format, and probably should try to do the same :)
One thing is to create something useful. Another
Terje Slettebø wrote:
From: Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I thought of one thing that might work reasonably well.
How about making ++io_format T save the current format in a stack.
and having io_format T-- restore the previously queuued format
I've thought of the exact same thing
Jason House wrote:
Terje Slettebø wrote:
Another possibility might be to have a sentry object, doing automatic state
saving and restoring in the constructor and destructor. In fact, there are
already such classes in Boost: Daryle Walker's I/O state savers, which fits
this situation
Terje Slettebø wrote:
It should handle maps and pairs
reasonably well. I think that I have the same complaints about this as
io_manip
The saving of information to the stream means that you can affect all
future output...
For instance, if you have a type
mapcustom_object,
Terje Slettebø wrote:
and given this:
int main()
{
char board[3][3]=
{
{'O','X','O'},
{'X','X','O'},
{'O','O','X'}
};
std::cout io_formatchar ()[3](\n|,|\n,|)
io_formatchar ()[3][3](---,---,---)
board '\n';
}
we get:
---
|O|X|O|
The first part of this is probably a stupid question
Terje Slettebø wrote:
What makes the template typedef proposal different from the template alias
proposal, is that the former may be specialised, and the latter may be
deduced.
What do you mean by deduced? I saw it in the proposal
I'm not familiar with the details, but could there be a typedef or
something like that in order to accept bidirectedS?
Or maybe replacing the bidirectionalS with bidirectedS and making
bidirectionalS typedef'd to bidirectedS?
Jeremy Siek wrote:
Hi Volodya,
No reason in particular for the
32 matches
Mail list logo
