Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.MapReduce: what next?
From: Philippe Vaucher (philippe.vaucher_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-31 11:05:47
> I definitly agree.Concepts like map-reduce are still at the state of "heard
>> of" for a lot of developpers, most of them think "it's a nice idea" but
>> they need concurrency their immediate real-world thinking is basic
>> Showing simple tasks solved the classic way and the map-reduce way,
>> the pros/cons of each approach would be a nice thing to have.
> I encourage you to see what Murray Cole and Marco Danelutto said about the
> exact same thing on skeletons in 1999-2005.
> The reasoning still hold.
I'm not sure what you meant by this, did you talk about stuffs like
http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/mic/ColePisa04.pdf ? Searching google for what
you said gives too much results about skeletons, I don't have time to read
them all and I'm not sure what to look for anyway.
Thanks for pointing out existing material tho :)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk