July 2020 - Boost - lists.stage.boost.cppalliance.org

CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
by Jon Kalb 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

The libraries produced by the Boost community have had a greater impact on the way that the C++ community writes code than any other library implementation. The focus of the Boost community will always be on the libraries, but it is undeniable that we are dependent on and often limited by the infrastructure of our trade. Years ago, the move to Git was contentious; yet, it was required to improve development. In a similar vein our build system has become an impediment for many developers and users, existing and prospective. Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting users and developers. We understand that the actual process of achieving the end goal will be long, time consuming, and not without its share of conflict. We also recognize that the Boost community is comprised of bright and passionate individuals that are eager to get involved and help get work done. The members of the Steering Committee have been encouraged by the discussions and activity surrounding CMake on the mailing lists over the years and know that many people have voiced visions. We hope that each of you rejoins the discussion to support this initiative and contributes to the common goal of improving Boost’s integration into the broader C++ ecosystem. For the Boost Steering Committee, Jon Kalb, Chair jonkalb(a)boost.org

49 199

Adding my sorting algorithm, ska_sort, to boost, attempt 2
by Malte Skarupke 24 Nov '21

24 Nov '21

Hi everyone, I started a discussion about this in October, but at the time the maintainer of the sort library was busy, then I was busy, so now it's January... I wrote a generalized version of radix sort a couple years ago and gave a talk about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqs87a_7zxw I would like to get a new version of that sorting algorithm into boost. It's faster than what I showed several years ago. It's also even more general and has a new interface that should be easier to extend. I uploaded the code here: https://github.com/skarupke/sort/tree/master The documentation is also already updated with new benchmark results. Let me know what's required to get this into boost. Would you like this in the form of a pull request? One of the big things that probably needs review is the interface, since radix sorting works differently than comparison based sorting. For most normal uses you just need to provide a sort key, but more complicated cases can get more complicated. I tried very hard to make everything easy, but I'd also be curious if others can come up with better ways of doing the interface. Thanks, Malte -- Malte Skarupke malteskarupke(a)fastmail.fm

8 10

[Core] gdb/VS Pretty-printers for Boost
by Jeff Trull 21 Aug '20

21 Aug '20

There's been a number of independent efforts to produce pretty-printers (or "visualizers") for different popular Boost libraries. The one I like most due to its thoughtful execution is probably this one <https://github.com/ruediger/Boost-Pretty-Printer>. But maintaining a set of pretty-printers out of tree is a challenge for all the usual reasons. Having libraries optionally supply and maintain them is much more sustainable. Would it be possible to define a small set of standard ways (file locations, build steps) for a library to store and install pretty-printers for gdb and/or Visual Studio? Thanks, Jeff

7 10

[release] Boost 1.74.0 beta 1 released
by Marshall Clow 09 Aug '20

09 Aug '20

Boost release 1.74.0 beta 1 is now available at: <https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/beta/1.74.0.beta.1/source/> The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 577a6b575ff2c227e14cce1b929c73d969475e58f3d2ab2901ad234f773bbd12 boost_1_74_0_b1.7z ba09c72dc848e7c0904922967014d853897b5a634926c910cc3b1fd627c31605 boost_1_74_0_b1.tar.bz2 2ccdc39efa076822cf1b359f9449f9d07707f3e27a18b393297b25885a9ff45b boost_1_74_0_b1.tar.gz c267c450166e040a374eaddab5e583cef09f6c3fe96a4db826172d0315c38dd5 boost_1_74_0_b1.zip For details of what's in the release, see < https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_74_0.html>. Please download the beta, give it a try, and report any problems you encounter. Issues that were found during the beta release process and will be fixed for the final 1.74.0 release: * The Boost.STLInterfaces documentation was left out of the beta. * Some of the Boost.Geometry documentation files have very long names; this could cause problems on platforms (like Windows) with shorter limits on path lengths. * There is a compile error in Boost.ASIO when compiling with 32-bit MSVC-14.2 with BOOST_BEAST_NO_TS_EXECUTORS. Thanks, -- The Boost Release Team

2 3

[release] 1.74.0 post-beta merges
by Marshall Clow 03 Aug '20

03 Aug '20

The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See <https://github.com/boostorg/wiki/wiki/Releases%3A-Beta-Merge-Policy> Reminder: The master branch closes for the release on August 5th. -- The release managers

13 52

Hello everybody, I have something to share about the shared_ptr class
by 逸霖杨 02 Aug '20

02 Aug '20

Hello dear boost members, I’m quite honored to join this mail list for the first time! As I was told that the boost project is where the shared_ptr class originated, so I think it should be OK to talk about it here. Here I have some ideas and code on my version of shared_ptr class. The aim is to remove the usage of weak_ptr and fix the circular reference problem. Please check code on https://github.com/yyl-20020115/RCGC That’s the idea and primitive implementation. I don’t know exactly how to test it more widely among situations, please help me to find the very situations that this solution would fail, and I’ll try to fix it ASAP. READM.md is a good start and README_ZHCN.md is better if you can read Chinese. However, I don’t think I can illustrate the algorithm very well both in English and Chinese. Well the code speaks for itself, and please read the code and run the program. Please generate a makefile and build with CMakeLists.txt on *nix platforms if Visual Studio 2019 (where I code the project) is not available. All ideas and discussions and help from you are all very welcome! Best Regards, Yilin

6 18

Re: [boost] About rcgc_shared_ptr
by 逸霖杨 31 Jul '20

31 Jul '20

A downgrade implementation can be like this (which is actually my former implementation during the experiments) We define an interface: struct IDIsposable { virtual void Dispose() = 0; }; And implement this interface with class A class A : public IDisposable { Public; A():disposed(false){} public: virtual void Dispose(){ if(!this->disposed){ this->_pb.Dispose();//this Dispose belongs to rcgc_shared_ptr this->_pc.Dispose(); //this Dispose belongs to rcgc_shared_ptr this->disposed = true; } } bool disposed; rcgc_shared_ptr<B> _pb; rcgc_shared_ptr<C> _pc; }; And we don’t care about ~A() and let the rcgc_shared_ptr call Dispose method of the IDisposable. This would avoid the dtors definition. However, this is not as elegant as the previous given solution in C++, having to write more code which we don’t like to do, although no difference in other languages or platforms. I’m sorry that I have to call it a day now and have to get some sleep (4:06am here) Waiting for your kindly response and suggestions. Best Regards, Yilin

1 0

Re: [boost] About rcgc_shared_ptr
by 逸霖杨 31 Jul '20

31 Jul '20

Hi, I finally understand what is Top-Post. And feel very sorry for the Top-Posted emails, please pardon me. My email writer is the default one with Win10, and it replies with Chinese RE, not English, and embedding Chinese characters. Also sorry for the inconvenience when you’re reading the replies. My aim is not to replace shared_ptr or weak_ptr, I’m trying to provide another choice. Personally, I don’t like to decide when to use shared_ptr or weak_ptr and also don’t like the IUnknown way of manually memory or object allocation management, just personally. I like GC when I code in C# or Java for I don’t have to remember the trivial things beyond my design, BUT not its performance. I code this in C++ because it would be too complicated if I insert code into JavaVM or C#’s native support platform. As we have great flexibility coding whatever we want in C++ on the infrastructure level. So this is what I’m going to do with this rcgc_shared_ptr: 1. use it in my projects, and make it go through tests to see If its capable of doing things.2. Trying to make this a part of a GC based language or platform to see any performance increasing. And if possible, just as I did in emails, contribute to communities and let other coders to decide if the work Is helpful or even harmful. Please forgive me to be such a rude guy for the first time to talk so much. However, I do hope you can debug the code and hope this can be any help. Best Regards, Yilin

1 0

Still about rcgc_shared_ptr, to Andrey
by 逸霖杨 31 Jul '20

31 Jul '20

Hi Andrey, I just put Case 1 into main function and updated the GitHub project, please pull and run. I don’t have reset function for rcgc_shared_ptr, so case 2 can not work for now. Best Regards, Yilin

1 0

[gil] Can I merge one fix for regression in 1.74?
by Mateusz Loskot 27 Jul '20

27 Jul '20

Dear Release Manager, We've received bug report about regression and have just fixed it in the develop branch of GIL: https://github.com/boostorg/gil/commit/8555ba08cd53c2ec5d65ea60bae9578ad586… Can I merge this fix to master? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

2 2