Subject: Re: [boost] [future] @Tom -> review result?
From: Johannes Brunen (JBrunen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-13 15:30:30
"Tom Brinkman" <reportbase_at_[hidden]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> Are we going to start picking through libraries that have already been
> standardized in Cx0 and begin adding them to boost?
> Not a good idea in my view. The interface is already available. Use it.´
As long as there aren't available implementations for the platforms boost
support, I think it is a good idea to do so. Additionally, we would be able
to extend and evolve such an interface and implementation.
> What is so special about the futures library?
It could be the backbone for higher level libraries. They may bring
multithreading programming to the mass.
> Why does Anthony not just slip "futures" it into boost::threads. He
> that library. Its a non-issue. He doesn't need our approval to do that.
IMHO, future concepts deserve a separate library.
> If we put it up for review again as top-level boost library, it will need
> to be
> fully documented, with samples and test cases.
> The library has been on the review boards for over a year. Plenty of time
> for these to have been
To make a library proposal to the community is one think. But to wait for
review and stay tuned is another one.
So the question to ask is whether one of the authors or another qualified
person is willing to bring forward a boostifiable implementation according
to the approved interface.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk