From: Valentin Samko (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-01 08:39:42
Take a look at
in general before you start. The first page describes the atomic
library interface which we discussed in April at the Berlin meeting.
A stable implementation of the proposed API would definitely be useful
although this API may change later. I am also not sure how much can be
achieved until compilers support the proposed memory model.
Sunday, April 30, 2006, 9:09:36 PM, you wrote:
MC> For the past month or so I've been working on a concurrency library which
MC> brings active types, atomic types, and parallel loop constructs and
MC> algorithms to C++. I am familiar with some of the concurrency projects
MC> already underway, though I'm sure my library would be able to coexist.
MC> I plan on proposing through SoC sometime later this week.
MC> Over the past two days I've also begun writing up some documentation using
MC> QuickBook to give a general idea as to the design of the
MC> library. Though I do have a lot of features already implemented, there
MC> is still a very large amount of work to be done prior to completion.
MC> Some feedback before I make the formal
MC> proposal would be nice, and it'd also be great to see if anyone is
MC> interested. Keep in mind that the documentation is only a rough outing and
MC> so there are a few unconnected links, but I do include a brief introduction
MC> and some basic usage examples including code snippets. The library is
MC> reference to as Surge.Act as that is the namespace I use for my personal
MC> libraries, though it will of course be changed to Boost.Act if it were to be
MC> For those familiar with the concept of futures and are confused as to why
MC> they are not mentioned, I will be adding all of that information to the
MC> rationale over the upcoming few days. I also apologize for not having better
MC> code examples.
MC> -Matt Calabrese
MC> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk