Asio considered a handler
> to be a continuation if the function asio_handler_is_continuation
> returned `true` when passed a pointer to an instance of that handle

Right, unmaintainable jiggery-pokery

The new Asio does not use this mechanism. Instead, it requires
> that the caller use post() if the handler is not a continuation and
> defer() if it is.

Good! *much* more sensible!

Thank you.





On 5 January 2018 at 17:10, Vinnie Falco via Boost-users <boost-users@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:05 AM, Richard Hodges via Boost-users
<boost-users@lists.boost.org> wrote:
>> And how would it know if the handler is a continuation?
>
> As I understand it, you can write your own handler objects, rather than than
> simply passing in a lambda or bind, which get notified either:
> 1. once on completion of the entire request, or
> 2. for every sub-operation of a compound operation such as async_read()
>
> asio figures out which one you mean through some template jiggery-pokery
> (technical term) and your handler gets called the right number of times, on
> the right thread.

I don't think that is correct. Pre Net-TS, Asio considered a handler
to be a continuation if the function asio_handler_is_continuation
returned `true` when passed a pointer to an instance of that handler
type. The new Asio does not use this mechanism. Instead, it requires
that the caller use post() if the handler is not a continuation and
defer() if it is. So the caller informs the implementation whether or
not the handler is a continuation, just like before but by invoking
the correct function.

However, it is not clear how to accomplish that. Which is why an
example would be helpful.

Thanks
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
Boost-users@lists.boost.org
https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users