Re: [boost] How to review futures?

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-12 04:01:36

"vicente.botet" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> writes:

> From: "Anthony Williams" <anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden]>
>> Douglas Gregor <dgregor_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>> On May 9, 2008, at 2:05 PM, John Phillips wrote:
>>>> * Should a subset of the approved library be restricted to only the
>>>> facilities and interface in the standardization committee proposal?
>>>
>>> Absolutely not. If we can do better than the committee proposal,
>>> let's do it and send the results to the C++ committee for consideration.
>>
>> Totally agreed. The proposal hasn't been approved by the committee yet, 
>> and
>> part of my drive in implementing it is to get feedback before it is 
>> approved
>> by the committee. We want to standardize the best interface we can get in 
>> the
>> time available.
>
> How many time do we have? When the review should take place to have time to 
> write a new submission?
> Anthony, do you intend to write this submission following the results of the 
> review?

The next mailing deadline is this coming Friday (16th May), so there is not
time for a full review before then. I will submit a paper with my revised
interface, potentially including any further comments received this week.

The actual WG21 committee meeting is 8th-14th June, so there is potential that
any further revisions received by then can be discussed.

Beyond that, I'm not sure what scope we've got. I'm happy to keep submitting
revisions until the LWG tell me that enough is enough, but as I understand it
we need the working draft to be done by the end of the following meeting
(14th-20th September) in order to get through the full ISO voting process in
2009. That means that the committee is going to be very restrictive of the
changes they accept: only revisions to already-accepted functionality will
even be considered.

If C++09 doesn't contain everything from boost.future (whatever it looks
like), there's always TR2.

> Before the review I think that it will be interesting that Anthony and 
> Braddock present separately or jointly, the advantages and liabilities of 
> each library.

I think that would be a worthwhile exercise.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Williams            | Just Software Solutions Ltd
Custom Software Development | http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk
Registered in England, Company Number 5478976.
Registered Office: 15 Carrallack Mews, St Just, Cornwall, TR19 7UL