Re: [boost] Futures

Subject: Re: [boost] Futures
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-05 08:41:15

> > > I'm really happy about this discussion here. Can you clarify what you
> mean
> > > by a future being type erased? You don't mean to say a future is a
> > > future<any>, do you?
> >
> > Presumably that the type of the future does not contain the type of the
> > callable function object it contains, thus requiring dynamic memory
> > allocation and indirection.
> 
> An interesting mind binder is if one makes ASIO's async_result
> vtabled i.e. a listener class.
> 
> That would make async_result ABI stable, and eliminate most of the
> rationale for improving futures, arguably even the present approach
> by Microsoft and the committee on how to do resumable functions.
> 
> I am personally surprised that Chris hasn't proposed this yet in one
> of this N-papers proposing the ASIO way of doing async instead of the
> current approach by the committee :)

Again, I don't see the 'current way' and 'Chris' way' as contradicting. They
are orthogonal and address different things.

Regards Hartmut
---------------
http://boost-spirit.com
http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu