Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-03-07 Thread Robert Middleton
I have just updated my PR with the new changes - at this point, the only class that we use from C++17 is std::shared_mutex, which has an equivalent implementation from boost. Currently, all builds on Github(Ubuntu, OSX, Windows) compile cleanly and pass all tests without boost. What I may do in t

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-03-04 Thread Thorsten Schöning
Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Donnerstag, 4. März 2021 um 00:46 schrieben Sie: > Sounds good. I'll update that in the coming days/weeks - I have a > deadline approaching for work, so I may not be able to do much for a > bit. If you know to run out of time at some point, consider pushing your br

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-03-03 Thread Robert Middleton
Sounds good. I'll update that in the coming days/weeks - I have a deadline approaching for work, so I may not be able to do much for a bit. I'll also assume that other C++11 features are available(e.g. std::thread, enhanced for loop) moving forward. -Robert Middleton On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:06

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-03-02 Thread Thorsten Schöning
Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Samstag, 27. Februar 2021 um 17:22 schrieben Sie: > As for removing them completely, it depends on what we want to do. > Personally, I don't like typedefs too much[...] I'm the opposite and prefer "log4cxx::LoggerPtr" in general, as in most cases I don't need to car

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-02-27 Thread Robert Middleton
> > Requiring C++11 also simplifies some code - as you saw, I left in some > > std::shared_ptrs around instead of log4cxx::pointer, but the code that > > detects for C++ wouldn't be needed if we can assume that it already > > exists(some detection code for C++14/17 features would still be > > requi

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-02-27 Thread Thorsten Schöning
Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Samstag, 27. Februar 2021 um 01:14 schrieben Sie: > I feel that requiring at least C++11 is perfectly reasonable at this > point. The latest release is a good choice for legacy systems, and if > needed we can branch from the last release(or from the current master >

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-02-26 Thread Robert Middleton
> > * If your compiler supports C++17, this should work without any external > > dependencies(apart from APR). Other compilers will require boost. > > Great and obviously a lot of work! Though, I've ran into multiple > problems with my old C++-Builder 10.2 UPD 3 with 32 Bit BCC-compiler. > "boost:

Re: [log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-02-26 Thread Thorsten Schöning
Guten Tag Robert Middleton, am Donnerstag, 18. Februar 2021 um 05:14 schrieben Sie: > * If your compiler supports C++17, this should work without any external > dependencies(apart from APR). Other compilers will require boost. Great and obviously a lot of work! Though, I've ran into multiple pro

[log4cxx] Smart pointer implementation

2021-02-17 Thread Robert Middleton
I now have a plausible implementation of log4cxx using smart pointers ready for review. Basic overview of the changes: * Removed all of the AddRef / ReleaseRef functions for the reference counting of objects, since that is now handled by the smart pointer * Added the ability to switch between cla