Re: [boost] [context review] Formal Review

Subject: Re: [boost] [context review] Formal Review
From: Vicente BOTET (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-23 12:41:20

> Message du 23/03/11 10:39
> De : "Artyom" 
> A : boost_at_[hidden]
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [boost] [context review] Formal Review
> 
> > This is my formal review.
> > 
> > > Please always state in your review, whether you think the library should be
> > > accepted as a Boost library!
> > 
> > Yes, it should be a part of boost.
> > 
> > (the alternative version with improved f/u-context support)
> > 
> 
> I want to add small notice.
> 
> The original review version had critical issue of
> binary compatibility of different builds that can be
> solved using template option (alternative system)
> or using pimpl ideom.
> 
> So even for official reviewed version I vote 
> **Yes** under _condition_ that ABI issue is 
> going to be fixed in whatever way the author
> seems to be correct.

Hi,

If I understand you don't need to choose between a fast (signal unaware) and a low (signal aware) implementation, but juts don't have ABI issues, isn't it?

On top of the current implementation Oliver could implement a movable context that hides its implementation, but that will need an allocation. The firsts version of the library provided just this movable context, but I think this is not the basic building block to make higher abstraction.

Best,
Vicente