[geos-devel] [UTF] envelope_class_test.cpp fixed for Boost 1.33

[Mateusz Łoskot]

strk at refractions.net wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 09:08:56PM +0100, Mateusz Å?oskot wrote:
>> Mateusz Łoskot wrote:
>>> Paul Ramsey wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> The situation in general makes me wary, if Boost is going to
>>>> changing incompatibly with some regularity.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, I also have similar thoughts. Honestly, I'm a bit surprised
>>> that some Boost library can break compatibility between releases
>>> 1.33 and 1.34. I have to discuss it with Gennadyi Rozental - the
>>> author of Boost.Test
>> 
>> 
>> So, as Gennadiy has explained me, Boost is backward compatible, but
>> not forward. It's safe to use older API from Boost 1.33.
> 
> 
> As you know debian stable ships with 1.32. As far as boost is known
> to be backward compatible I think we should stick with oldest
> release. Ideally before 1.32, but if that's the oldest we have access
> to I think it's a good candidate.


OK, let's give Boost last chance :-)
Please, could you check if the envelope test (attached to this thread)
runs well with Boost 1.32?
It is based on older and backward compatible API>


>> Complete story I'd suggest to take a look at is here,
>> 
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.user/17409
>> 
>> 
>> Now, I don't want to make much commotion about tests, and if we've
>> just decided to go on with TUT that's OK for me.
> 
> 
> That's ok with me too. Anyway, since automake tests are already
> there, and we might be using other boost feature in future
> refactoring, I'd go with boost. Of course I'm assuming backward
> compatibility for all 1.XXX versions.


OK, so please check this envelope test with Boost 1.32 and if it run 
well, then I'll keep going with Boost. OK?


>> But my next question is more about GEOS future. Should be Boost 
>> considered or not? As we discussed it much with Sandro and Norman
>> on the #postgis channel, in future it would be nice to move to
>> modern C++, so then I suppose it's not possible to drop Boost (I
>> mean without huge amount of work :-)). So, I'm trying to convince
>> myself about that Boost is still good piece of software and worth
>> to use.
>> 
>> If I'd like to redesign "something" in GEOS, rewrite in more 
>> safe/short/elegant way then how should I do it to provide useful
>> code? Is this OK if I'll use Boost e.g. it's Smart Pointers or
>> other stuff.
> 
> 
> I'd say not before release 3.0.0. Worth adding comments in the code
> with *suggestions* on where to use it. Anyway, there are many places
> where, not "modern", but "simple" C++ should be enforced :)


Sure, that's clear. But if I'll find some time, then I can do some tests 
to discuss it.


Cheers
-- 
Mateusz Łoskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net