Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Flow-based programming library for Boost?
From: Marcus Tomlinson (themarcustomlinson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-06 07:37:32

This is a very powerful and impressive modeling system, but its very intimidating! Don't get me wrong, this is obviously my opinion. I believe this is why so few people use (or are even aware of) flow-based programming in their projects (hobbyists + companies).

As I've said, my intention is to make flow-based programming more accessible and easy-to-use/learn/understand, mainly because when I was getting into it all I could find we're these very complex implementations that scare me. The scarcity of documentation on DSPatch isn't helping at the moment I think, but I'm working on that.

Anyone that has just read this, please let me know what you think about my view on the dataflow/flow-based programming options (or perhaps a lack thereof) out there.

On 05 Dec 2012, at 8:53 PM, <Charles_J_Wilson_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I believe that you should be looking at SystemC's Transaction-Level Modeling (TLM) piece for a comparison of a higher level abstraction modeling system. It should be noted that SystemC is cross-platform.
> In a previous life, I served on the SystemC TLM committee. When teaching SystemC, we used both airport luggage handling and shipping company package handling systems as models to teach the techniques of creating various system abstractions.
> For a conference I did a session on how to connect the system simulations to a real-time external system (simulator to frame buffer) as a demonstration of how the simulations could interact with real-world bits.
> Charles Wilson
> Software Development Senior Engineer
> Dell | Product Group
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-
>> bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Marcus Tomlinson
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 11:27 AM
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [boost] Flow-based programming library for Boost?
>> Hmm, well SystemC is clearly very powerful and can easily achieve the same
>> results, but my particular domain is more the higher-level, cross platform,
>> easy-to-use, PC applications. OMNet++ is closer to what I have, but my aim is
>> total abstraction from the particular application. DSPatch allows you to build
>> flow-based programs for any application you can think of.
>> I looked at many implantations of this nature while developing DSPatch and
>> found that there was almost always a steep learning curve to using them.
>> Not only do I want to make dataflow / flow-based programming easier for
>> developers, I want to make it more accessable. Hopefully if I can get the
>> support I need to get this project on Boost, it'll be widely accessible and
>> helpful to people like me who are/were looking for something like this. This
>> kind of programming paradigm is so useful in so many applications, it really
>> shouldn't be as niche a topic as it is. Perhaps it's always been portrayed as too
>> complex?
>> Sent from my iPad
>> On 05 Dec 2012, at 5:36 PM, Vicente Botet <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>> Marcus Tomlinson wrote
>>>> Is there any interest out there for a library that allows you to
>>>> create fast, efficient flow-based programs with an easy-to-use
>>>> object-oriented interface?
>>>> (
>>>> I've created an open-source library that does this, called "DSPatch"
>>>> (
>>>> and would like to contribute
>>>> it to the Boost Libraries.
>>>> Please let me know if this sounds like something you'd like to see in
>>>> Boost.
>>> Hi,
>>> how your library compare to SystemC or OMNet++?
>>> Vicente
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>> for-
>>> Boost-tp4639450p4639477.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list
>>> archive at
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

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