Hi Pavol,
Pavol Droba wrote:
I'm already aware of string_algo and using it a bit. I wasn't aware it
has tokenizer component, though.
It was added only a few days ago along with some other improvements and
more stuff is comming in the near future.
Ah... the problem is that those new
Hi,
Ah... the problem is that those new additions are not documented, AFAICT ;-)
It makes it a little bit hard to understand the interface, especially since
there are no examples/tests for split functionality.
Well, as I said, this stuff is quite new, documentation will follow soon, please
Hi Bruce,
Bruce Barr wrote:
I'm glad Vladimir got me to take another look at this.
I'm submitting a new patch to replace the one
submitted on May 30.
And I'm glad you're willing to polish your patch!
There are other differences between the recursive and
nonrecursive versions that, in my
I added another test file for the I/O-state saving classes. It's in
the main Boost CVS as boost/libs/io/test/ios_state_unit_test.cpp.
I have two compilers installed (GCC 3.1 and CodeWarrior 8). I wrote
and tested the new file with CodeWarrior. But my GCC doesn't support
the wchar_t part of
I've run into a problem using sandbox::boost/sequence_algo/algorithm.hpp.
The header uses boost::find, but that function can't really be used,
because:
1. (minor) it depends on new iterator adaptors, while I'm using sandbox with
boost CVS.
2. It's not possible to use boost::find, since, as
Hi,
Here's some code for the validator class, in iterator_adaptors.hpp:
// line 741
// This is really a partial concept check for iterators. Should it
// be moved or done differently?
template class Category, class Value, class Difference, class Pointer,
class Reference
struct validator
- Original Message -
From: Pavel Vozenilek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:38 PM
Subject: [boost] Re: BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT - a little better
John Torjo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
I was just thinking
Comments?
Sounds reasonably to me, but I admit that I don't really understand POSIX
filesystems. I guess what I really wanted was something that would be
equivalent to rm -f file, remember that we already have the equivalent to
rm -r path. Of course I don't know how one would implement that
John Torjo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When creating the STATIC_CONSTANTs, was | what was meant, or was ||
meant to be there, like this:
BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT(
bool, is_input_or_output_iter
=
(boost::is_convertibleCategory*,std::input_iterator_tag*::value
Eric Friedman wrote:
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 other MPL
headers
David Abrahams wrote:
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd apply the patch myself, but due to the heavy use of preprocessed
headers, I'm worried I won't get it completely right. So I'll leave
it up to Aleksey (or others) to fix.
AFAICT, Aleksey is the only one who knows how to
Jeff Garland wrote:
I'd like to replace my code by boost::date_time, but conversion
from boost::date_time to timeval doesn't seem to be supported.
You are right, but this would make a nice addition.
I'd suggest these two converters to be added:
timeval to_timeval(const ptime t)
{
ptime
Terje Slettebø wrote:
From: Daniel Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:01:19 +0200, Terje Slettebø wrote:
Another thing, are the ADD_OPERATOR macro in your code necessary? It
compiles fine without it on Intel C++ 7.1.
The GCC doesn't work without the operators, as it doesn't implicitly
S. Seefeld wrote
I'd suggest these two converters to be added:
timeval to_timeval(const ptime t)
...
timeval to_timeval(const time_duration d)
...
the latter is especially useful as select() operates with durations,
so there is no need to convert between 1970-01-01 relative dates and
Jeff Garland wrote:
Ok will do. I'll add some protections or rounding for when durations
support higher than microsecond resolution. I'll let you know when
this gets added.
Thanks a lot !
Stefan
___
Unsubscribe other changes:
These are interesting results, but my enthusiasm is severely reduced by the fact
that MSVC 7.1 (Standard) chokes terminally on both versions :-((
Compiling...
Frey_bench_mark_gcc.cpp
Frey_bench_mark_gcc.cpp(82) : warning C4305: 'return' : truncation from 'double'
to 'float'
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 19:54:36 +0200, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
These are interesting results, but my enthusiasm is severely reduced by
the fact that MSVC 7.1 (Standard) chokes terminally on both versions
:-((
Compiling...
Frey_bench_mark_gcc.cpp
Frey_bench_mark_gcc.cpp(82) : warning C4305:
Hello,
Since this is my first posting to the Boost List, let me first say
thanks for Boost. It looks like a great resource! My first use of
Boost will be the date_time library, followed by the file_system
library.
Now, the reason for my posting. I am using MSVC 7.0 and am unable to
compile the
Hi there,
I just checked out the latest CVS and I am having trouble building it.
My environment is:
- Windows XP
- Intel Version 7.1, Build 20030402Z
- Visual C++ 7.0
All my environment variables are setup correctly (INCLUDE, LIB, MSVCDIR,
INTEL_PATH, PATH). The command line I am using with
Hi Vladimir,
Vladimir Prus wrote:
There's another question: why store u at all. I'm
guessing source(*ei, g) might be more efficient?
That's a good thought, but there might be a problem
trying to dereference a past-the-end iterator. I
mentioned before that ei_end could always be generated
from
Chris,
Sorry for the long delay, I was swamped with other stuff.
The longer I think about your suggestions about FSM protocols the more do I
think that coded FSM protocol specifications are not worth the effort. Even
worse, I believe they will inevitably lead to code duplication. However,
since I
Aleksey Gurtovoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd apply the patch myself, but due to the heavy use of preprocessed
headers, I'm worried I won't get it completely right. So I'll leave
it up to Aleksey (or others) to fix.
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Daniel Frey
| Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 7:44 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: [boost] RE: Math constants - efficiency
|
|
| On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 19:54:36 +0200, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
|
| These are
NetBSD does not have WCHAR_MIN/MAX using gcc3.3 basicaly the min/max for
wchar_t is INT_MIN/MAX similarly to freeBSD
I encountered this problem when trying to compile boost.python which
failed because of this problem.
___
Unsubscribe other changes:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 06:53:28AM -0700, Jeff Garland wrote:
[snip]
Ok will do. I'll add some protections or rounding for when durations
support higher than microsecond resolution. I'll let you know when
this gets added.
It seems that since 1) timeval is non-(C++) standard, and 2) it is
25 matches
Mail list logo
