adding boost/bind/bind.hpp includes to files missing them and replacing <boost/bind.hpp> with <boost/bind/bind.hpp> #3

lucasw · 2024-08-02T16:19:03Z

I was getting many of these warning messages until I made these changes, building on Ubuntu 24.04:

In file included from /usr/include/boost/smart_ptr/detail/requires_cxx11.hpp:9,
                 from /usr/include/boost/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.hpp:17,
                 from /usr/include/boost/shared_ptr.hpp:17,
                 from /home/lucasw/ros/ros1/install/underlay_ws/src/ros_comm/clients/roscpp/include/ros/forwards.h:37,
                 from /home/lucasw/ros/ros1/install/underlay_ws/devel/.private/roscpp/include/ros/common.h:37,
                 from /home/lucasw/ros/ros1/install/underlay_ws/src/ros_comm/clients/roscpp/include/ros/subscriber_link.h:31,
                 from /home/lucasw/ros/ros1/install/underlay_ws/src/ros_comm/clients/roscpp/include/ros/intraprocess_subscriber_link.h:30,
                 from /home/lucasw/ros/ros1/install/underlay_ws/src/ros_comm/clients/roscpp/src/libros/intraprocess_subscriber_link.cpp:29:
/usr/include/boost/bind.hpp:36:1: note: ‘#pragma message: The practice of declaring the Bind placeholders (_1, _2, ...) in the global namespace is deprecated. Please use <boost/bind/bind.hpp> + using namespace boost::placeholders, or define BOOST_BIND_GLOBAL_PLACEHOLDERS to retain the current behavior.’
   36 | BOOST_PRAGMA_MESSAGE(
      | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

…ost bind, and changing all includes to use the longer path as called for by the pragma warning message 'Please use <boost/bind/bind.hpp>'

lucasw · 2024-08-02T16:22:15Z

This appears to duplicate https://sources.debian.org/patches/ros-ros-comm/1.16.0%2Bds-6/0008-Update-bind.hpp-location.patch/

v4hn · 2024-08-06T14:32:17Z

The reason why I did not push this patch here before is that some repositories still transitively use boost's _1 from these headers without including <boost/bind.hpp> and these start failing when the headers are changed.
The number shrunk a lot though since we started ros-o.

I absolutely agree that the warnings are problematic though and hinder debugging of real issues. I started going through my stack of repos again, fixing the remaining issues here. I found two hand full so far which I already fixed in ros-o or upstream where I have access.

** -- Edit --**

It's a pretty large hand full still, let's see how long I need to get through them...

this relied on an implicit include of `boost/bind.hpp` from the ros_comm headers and ROS-O changes this include due to countless downstream warnings. ros-o/ros_comm#3

these relied on an implicit include of `boost/bind.hpp` from the ros_comm headers and ROS-O changes this include due to countless downstream warnings. ros-o/ros_comm#3

this relied on an implicit include of `boost/bind.hpp` from the ros_comm headers and ROS-O changes this include due to countless downstream warnings. ros-o/ros_comm#3

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3 (copyright updates required by Shadow CI)

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3 (copyright updates are enforced by Shadow's CI)

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3

These were implicitly included through ros_comm and [ROS-O] will likely change that include soon ros-o/ros_comm#3 due to an excessive amount of warnings.

The symbol was included through ros_comm, but ROS-O plans to change that include due to excessive deprecation warnings: ros-o/ros_comm#3 Lambdas should be preferred over bind these days.

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3 (copyright updates required by Shadow CI)

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3 (copyright updates are enforced by Shadow's CI)

v4hn · 2024-08-19T23:36:24Z

@lucasw was there a reason why you did not migrate message_filters as well?

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3 (copyright updates required by Shadow CI)

lucasw · 2024-08-19T23:39:18Z

@lucasw was there a reason why you did not migrate message_filters as well?

No I must have missed that

The symbols have always been used through implicit includes from ros_comm, but ROS-O considers changing these includes right now because of excessive deprecation warnings building all of ROS. ros-o/ros_comm#3 (copyright updates are enforced by Shadow's CI)

using a lambda is encouraged from c++11. This breaks with a recent [ROS-O] proposal to adapt a ros_comm header include API. ros-o/ros_comm#3

lambdas should be preferred. This implicit use breaks with a recently proposed API change for ros_comm in ROS-O. ros-o/ros_comm#3

Lambdas are preferred since c++11. The transitively included use of _1 starts failing with a recently proposed change to adapt the boost-bind include API in ros_comm. ros-o/ros_comm#3

v4hn · 2024-08-27T09:29:47Z

I have everything on my side that built before building with the patches as well now.
See here and the various patches referenced in this PR.

Multiple unconsidered packages will still require an additional patch due to this change, but as this is integrated in at least two other build types for some time already (Debian and your work @lucasw) and it removes a huge amount of bloat from the build logs, I will go ahead and merge.

adding boost/bind/bind.hpp includes to files missing them that use bo…

3bc9bf1

…ost bind, and changing all includes to use the longer path as called for by the pragma warning message 'Please use <boost/bind/bind.hpp>'

v4hn mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2024

[ROS-O] remove use of deprecated _1 ros/ros_realtime#16

Open

v4hn added a commit to PR2/pr2_common_actions that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2024

add boost prefix to _1

7f34d64

this relied on an implicit include of `boost/bind.hpp` from the ros_comm headers and ROS-O changes this include due to countless downstream warnings. ros-o/ros_comm#3

v4hn added a commit to PR2/pr2_gripper_sensor that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2024

add boost prefix to _1

a9067f8

this relied on an implicit include of `boost/bind.hpp` from the ros_comm headers and ROS-O changes this include due to countless downstream warnings. ros-o/ros_comm#3

v4hn mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2024

[ROS-O] drop deprecated use of boost _1, _2 shadow-robot/sr-ros-interface-ethercat#267

Open

v4hn mentioned this pull request Aug 6, 2024

[ROS-O] drop deprecated use of boost _1, _2 shadow-robot/sr_core#239

Open

v4hn mentioned this pull request Aug 11, 2024

drop use of obsolete _1 symbols ros-perception/laser_proc#13

Merged

v4hn added a commit to ros-o/urg_node that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2024

remove implicitly used boost::bind symbols

d3a14fd

These were implicitly included through ros_comm and [ROS-O] will likely change that include soon ros-o/ros_comm#3 due to an excessive amount of warnings.

v4hn mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2024

[ROS-O] remove implicitly used boost::bind symbols ros-drivers/urg_node#116

Open

v4hn added a commit to ros-o/slam_gmapping that referenced this pull request Aug 20, 2024

drop deprecated use of boost::bind's _1

1768381

using a lambda is encouraged from c++11. This breaks with a recent [ROS-O] proposal to adapt a ros_comm header include API. ros-o/ros_comm#3

v4hn added a commit to ros-o/slam_karto that referenced this pull request Aug 20, 2024

drop obsolete use of boost's _1

5c84a19

lambdas should be preferred. This implicit use breaks with a recently proposed API change for ros_comm in ROS-O. ros-o/ros_comm#3

This was referenced Aug 20, 2024

[ROS-O] drop obsolete use of boost::bind and _1 ZebraDevs/fetch_ros#167

Open

[ROS-O] do away with boost::bind ros/geometry_tutorials#86

Merged

v4hn mentioned this pull request Aug 20, 2024

[ROS-O] drop deprecated use of boost::bind's _1 ros-perception/slam_gmapping#110

Merged

v4hn closed this in 445ea8a Aug 27, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

adding boost/bind/bind.hpp includes to files missing them and replacing <boost/bind.hpp> with <boost/bind/bind.hpp> #3

adding boost/bind/bind.hpp includes to files missing them and replacing <boost/bind.hpp> with <boost/bind/bind.hpp> #3

lucasw commented Aug 2, 2024 •

edited

Loading

lucasw commented Aug 2, 2024

v4hn commented Aug 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading

v4hn commented Aug 19, 2024

lucasw commented Aug 19, 2024

v4hn commented Aug 27, 2024

adding boost/bind/bind.hpp includes to files missing them and replacing <boost/bind.hpp> with <boost/bind/bind.hpp> #3

adding boost/bind/bind.hpp includes to files missing them and replacing <boost/bind.hpp> with <boost/bind/bind.hpp> #3

Conversation

lucasw commented Aug 2, 2024 • edited Loading

lucasw commented Aug 2, 2024

v4hn commented Aug 6, 2024 • edited Loading

v4hn commented Aug 19, 2024

lucasw commented Aug 19, 2024

v4hn commented Aug 27, 2024

lucasw commented Aug 2, 2024 •

edited

Loading

v4hn commented Aug 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading