Subject: Re: [boost] [RPC] Boost.Asio to write *concurrency ready* code
From: Lars Viklund (zao_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-28 16:45:10
(I took the liberty of normalizing the case of the message I replied to)
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 03:46:40AM +0800, microcai wrote:
> No one, not a single one comment on my code. Instead, attack on my words.
Yes, your code demonstrates a conversion of a dependency-less recursive
algorithm into a sequence of chaining asynchronous operations.
That's nice, and an example of how a generic enough library with a
well-defined scope can be used to implement problems that can be solved
by dispatching asynchronous events.
If your original post had some underlying untold message like "is this a
good way to do this" or "is there any unknown problems with my
approach", it did not quite get through.
> Come on, I am not politics. I don't know how to please audience.
A lot of us do not have English as a first language, but when in doubt,
we try our best to not be insulting and avoid cursewords and other
Communication with your peers in person in your own language is often a
hard thing. Doing it over the internet with people from different
cultures, backgrounds and native languages, requires a lot of patience,
simplified language and great care in not using offensive concepts or
For example, this mail is very mellow and refined from my initial stream
of conciousness that first went into it. As a mail is a near-permanent
record of ones words, it's often wise to choose them well and to not
make enemies unnecessarily.
> Please comment on my code. Boost.AFIO is off topic here.
Starting a thread does not confer any right to dictate how the thread
evolves and forks. You can steer the direction by not participating in
the parts of the thread you do not care about, or by participating more
in the parts that you do care about.
> I dislike Boost.AFIO's API, Don't force me to like it. And don't turn
> this thread into Boost.AFIO wars.
There is a difference between constructive criticism or suggestions on
how to improve or adapt the interface, and just proclaiming it
Maybe you could elaborate on what parts of the interface are unsuitable,
and how it could be expressed in a more elegant way, without losing the
benefits it brings, particularly the sequencing of operations mentioned
> Boost.AFIO is off topic here.
You're free to filter and killfile your mailbox in any way you want.
-- Lars Viklund | zao_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk