Subject: Re: [boost] [future] @Tom -> review result?
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-12 16:58:16
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Brinkman" <reportbase_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 9:58 PM
Subject: [boost] [future] @Tom -> review result?
>>> as Vicente lready ask - what is the result of the future review?!
>>> @Tom could you confirm that you are still working on the review summary?
> Yes, i'm still working on it. I've created a test framework that
> explores issues that I'm concerned about.
> For the most part, I'm more concerned about the bigger picture and how
> parralel programming is added to boost. There are many issues that
> will need to be considered.
> The story of parralel programming is still evolving and needs the
> input of many more people who have practical real world experience,
> particularly about task managment.
> Of course, you can still comment on how you would like to procceed.
> Unfortunately, as far as this review goes, I would have liked to see
> many more comments and reviews.
I'm sure that the library interest a lot of boosters. As you have heard, some of them found the context and goal of the review not enough clear. What about starting the review again setting up cleary the context of the review? Could you and the authors discuss if this can be organized?
I realy think that freezing this library will have as consequence the freeze of at least these libraries: ThreadPool, AsynchronousExecutors, Threader/Joiner (both included for the moment in Interthreads), Active Object ...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk