On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:17:35 -0500, David Abrahams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It's hard for me to justify any other interpretations under a strict
>reading of the standard.
Yes.
>I am tempted to open a DR about this, but
>I'm not sure exactly how much we should ask for. Shooting for the
>moon,
I've noticed that the philosophy of boost as it concerns long long is:
if the type exists then use it. Since it is a non standard feature
shouldn't it be used only if requested by the user (e.g. with a macro
from the command line:
-DBOOST_ENABLE_LONG_LONG
)?. I ask this because in --pedantic m
> Considering what we've seen in the recent thread
> "BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT and VC++ enums", I thought to add a warning for
> VC++ users in the config docs. Also, there's a note saying
>
>
> "Note that in the above example value will have different
>lvalueness, depending on whether the compil
Now, we intend to translate boost library document into Japanese, and
publish them on the web.
Then, we want to ask you some points.
First, are there any problems about license or copylight?
For example, sholed we require permission of each author/developer
of each library for translation?
Secon
"John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
00e801c2c535$8ce128a0$c37487d9@1016031671">news:00e801c2c535$8ce128a0$c37487d9@1016031671...
> > Considering what we've seen in the recent thread
> > "BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT and VC++ enums", I thought to add a warning for
> > VC++ users in the conf
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, k.takahashi wrote:
> Now, we intend to translate boost library document into Japanese, and
> publish them on the web.
>
> Then, we want to ask you some points.
>
> First, are there any problems about license or copylight?
There should not be any problems with license or copyri
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 10:05:51 -0500, "Edward Diener"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>For Borland, the default is to make enum's int sized but this can be changed
>with the -b- option in which enums are made as small as possible depending
>on the range.
Yes. The original problem, anyhow, was not about
Shouldn't we stick the -b- option in our borland toolset, since it
increases conformance?
Gennaro Prota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 10:05:51 -0500, "Edward Diener"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>For Borland, the default is to make enum's int sized but this can be changed
Gennaro Prota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:17:35 -0500, David Abrahams
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>It's hard for me to justify any other interpretations under a strict
>>reading of the standard.
>
> Yes.
>
>>I am tempted to open a DR about this, but
>>I'm not sure exac
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 12:08:35 -, "John Maddock"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No go ahead, BTW other compilers (Borland and Sun off the top of my head),
>always make enum's int sized as well.
Ok. It's not clear to me if you prefer having no caveat at all, or
generalizing it a bit though.
I don'
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 12:33:38 -0500, David Abrahams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Shouldn't we stick the -b- option in our borland toolset, since it
>increases conformance?
Personally I would prefer that, yes (not for BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT
though, as I said in the other post). The important thing to
In view of the pending comittee meeting, and knowing those involved will
be wanting to tie down any loose ends, I'm going to ask a thread-related
question which relates as much to language support (I think) as boost
thread, but this seems to be the active place for threads/ISO at the
moment (please
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 18:50:13 +0100, David Abrahams wrote:
> Hum. It's fine to make Peter's particular example defined, but I'm a
> little concerned about asking to lift *all* undefined behavior for
Maybe I'm missing something, but what about a pointer to some type T and
this:
if( p ) p->f();
I
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 12:50:13 -0500, David Abrahams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Gennaro Prota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>I am tempted to open a DR about this, but
>>>I'm not sure exactly how much we should ask for. Shooting for the
>>>moon, we could ask that an expression can only invoke unde
"David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Shouldn't we stick the -b- option in our borland toolset, since it
> increases conformance?
In C++ Builder you can use a #pragma to ensure enum size from within a
header file using enums no matte
Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 18:50:13 +0100, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Hum. It's fine to make Peter's particular example defined, but I'm a
>> little concerned about asking to lift *all* undefined behavior for
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but what about a poi
At 09:12 AM 1/26/2003, k.takahashi wrote:
>Now, we intend to translate boost library document into Japanese, and
>publish them on the web.
Wonderful!
>Then, we want to ask you some points.
>
>First, are there any problems about license or copylight?
>For example, sholed we require permission of
Michel André said:
>>> Ok! Actually the only reason for me to want the old style is that it
>>> will take longer for me to adopt 1.30 and later because I would have
>>> to convince my CM guys to remake install and packaging, but thats
>>> more of a political hurdle than a technical one. So it's ok
Alisdair Meredith said:
> In view of the pending comittee meeting, and knowing those involved will
> be wanting to tie down any loose ends, I'm going to ask a thread-related
> question which relates as much to language support (I think) as boost
> thread, but this seems to be the active place for
At 06:16 PM 1/26/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 18:50:13 +0100, David Abrahams wrote:
>>
>>> Hum. It's fine to make Peter's particular example defined, but I'm a
>>> little concerned about asking to lift *all* undefined behavior for
>>
"William E. Kempf" wrote:
> Yes, this is trivially implemented with boost::thread_specific_ptr<>.
> Well, it may require the use of boost::once() as well, which complicates
> things a little, but it's not that bad. As for language extensions,
> that's still being thought on.
Thanks, now I know w
Beman Dawes wrote:
> Another factor is participation. How many people show up at meetings, how
> many people volunteer to do work? The committee, like Boost, is an all
> volunteer organization. If no one volunteers, the work doesn't get done.
> That's why Boosters on the committee have tried to en
22 matches
Mail list logo
