Boost logo

Boost :

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
> generation.
> > 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
proposed changes?

- Jeff

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at