Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Process 0.3 released
From: Ilya Sokolov (ilyasokol_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-22 15:53:12

Boris wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:57:30 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> Hi Ilya,
>> Boris wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>> I just saw that Ilya Sokolov created another snapshot based on
>>> Boost.Process in SVN. That means we have again at least two different
>>> versions of Boost.Process. :-/
>> It is not a problem. We can merge our libraries, but I prefer to do it
>> later, when we both investigate the most of problems independently. I
>> hope we will achieve a better design this way, what do you think?
> from what I understand you plan more to play around with the design?


> My plan was and is to create a Boost.Process version which works reliably
> today as I need to manage child processes in a commercial software (that
> was the reason why I picked up Boost.Process at all). That's why I
> concentrated on stabilizing code and testing everything.


> If you plan to continue to play around with the design (like dropping
> classes like posix_context and win32_context) I think it's a good idea
> to do this in a different version. I wouldn't mind if someone takes over
> my Boost.Process version (feel free to copy the implementation of
> various functions if you want, Ilya).

Thank a lot! Feel free to do the same.

> I just need versions which are
> safe to use in a commercial project. From what I've seen your
> Boost.Process version wouldn't compile for example in MSVC if Unicode is
> used?

I have not tried yet. I'll think more about i18n later.

> Regarding future development: I plan to improve support for asynchronous
> I/O. I'm also interested in integrating Boost.Interprocess and
> Boost.Process somehow (like using shared memory instead of streams for
> interprocess communication). What are your plans?

Right now I am concentrated on the basic interfaces and concepts. I'll
try to release on a weekly basis (every Sunday, specifically). Stay tuned!

P.S. Here is my bug report: instances of non-copyable file_handle class
are used in standard containers, which is UB.

> Boris
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at