Re: [boost] [shmem-interprocess] Shmem 0.93 and update on Interprocess

From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-11 04:57:27

> I think you should separate the two things.  Get the required changes in 
> and make the initial version of the library available, then work on new 
> features.

Right. But I should state that changes in Shmem/Interprocess are quite 
problematic since binary compatibility is required in all the classes 
placed in shared memory/memory mapped files (mutex, condition, 
containers, allocators, rw_locks...). That means that a change in those 
classes (for example, adding a more efficient version of a 
synchronization object) will mean that the user must recompile all the 
processes using Shmem/Interprocess. So I would like to minimize breaking 
changes, so the first official Interprocess should be pretty stable.

> As soon as you upload and register into the regression system you will 
> get to see how it works on a variety of platforms (well, at least after 
> 1.34 ships you will).  Folks interested in a particular 
> compiler/platform may start looking at it an helping you port.  And 
> beyond the formal regression tests, others of us regularly update, 
> rebuild, and run regression tests.  I don't tend to mess with anything 
> in the sandbox unless I really, really want to use it for something (in 
> fact we really need to clean the old stuff out).  Most new Boost 
> developers don't realize that the process of getting in CVS and the 
> regression test system will take a couple months...

All right. I will request write access in CVS and I will start learning 
the regression system.

> I just worry about you falling into the circular_buffer trap.  A 
> perfectly usable and accepted library that 2 years later because of some 
> issues the author doesn't now have time to address. It's a loss to the 
> community and a shame.  I don't have an immediate need for 
> inter-process, but there's alot of concurrency/multi-process code in 
> progress in Boost for SOC and otherwise. Interprocess is a piece of that 
> puzzle -- so I'd like to see more eyes and testing on it sooner rather 
> than later.  Getting it into CVS accomplishes the first step.

Agreed.

Ion