Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done
From: Boris Schaeling (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-02 17:35:00

On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 22:58:27 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>  
wrote:

> On 03.09.2010 0:27, Boris Schaeling wrote:
>> On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:36:33 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02.09.2010 2:09, Boris Schaeling wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 23:51:07 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I quote then the paragraph starting with "The benefits of using
>>>>>> components from other libraries...". ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, while it all sounds good in theory how many developers are  
>>>>>> out
>>>>>> there trying to use single Boost libraries without installing the
>>>>>> others?
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I wasn't thinking about such developers, but about
>>>>> compilation
>>>>> time (lexical cast and algo.str), portability and stability
>>>>> (filesystem).
>>>>>
>>>>>> It sounds like a bit too much effort reinventing what has been
>>>>>> implemented in other Boost libraries for what I expect is a  
>>>>>> relatively
>>>>>> small group of developers?
>>>>>
>>>>> The dependencies I object to are easy to avoid.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding boost::lexical_cast: There is to_string() in Boost.Uuid in
>>>> 1.44 but not in 1.43. Or what were you thinking of?
>>>
>>> I was thinking about sprintf or ostringstream. If you add async_pipe,
>>> there will be no need for Boost.Uuid
>>
>> I don't want to give up named_pipe entirely as we don't know if someone
>> has a need for it.
>
> Sorry for my obscure explanations, I meant that we could have the
> following kinds of pipe:
>
> - pipe (i.e. anonymous pipe)
> - named_pipe (requires a name as an argument, no need to generate it)
> - async_pipe
>      - POSIX: typedef'ed to pipe
>      - Windows: derived from named_pipe, uses UuidCreateSequential()
>        for the random name

Ah, I see - makes sense. If you agree that boost::function<> makes even  
more sense (see my other posting today) I'll update Boost.Process  
accordingly.

Boris