Subject: Re: [boost] [context/coroutine] split into two libs in trunk?!
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-12 14:11:25
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver Kowalke <oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden]>wrote:
> > What kind of changes have been needed to make it possible to implement
> > coroutine and generator?
> the context class, which holds a pointer do context_base class, is now
> transformed to a template (e.g. Signature as template arg) but still holds
> a pointer to context_base class which did not change.
> I'm using the 'curiously recurring template pattern' for the interface
> > I see 3 valid alternatives here:
> > * You provide it as sub-library coroutine of context.
> > * You request for review a separated coroutine proposal.
> > * You rename your context library as cooperative/context and add the
> > cooperative/coroutine, cooperative/fiber, ..... This will need at least a
> > mini-mini review to change the goal, the name and the directory of the
> > library. This alternative would not prevent to request less formal review
> > or
> > formal ones if you find it useful. I would prefer a change the top level
> > namespace to cooperative in this case.
> OK - I would rename boost.context to cooperative/context.
> How should this mini-mini review take place? Do I've to ask on the mailing
> list or would be the conclusions of this thread enought?
I think if everyone is aware of the reorganization and no one objects, a
(mini-)* review maybe wouldn't be necessary? Maybe send personal emails to
those involved in the Context review to ensure they're aware of any
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk