Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber review January 6-15
From: Oliver Kowalke (oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-10 02:26:47
2014/1/9 Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>
> The algorithm class should be called scheduler.
> Either his definition is hidden to the user or you don't use detail and
> document all the needed types.
usually the user don't have to care but it allows the user to implement its
> Please replace _ws by work_stealing.
> Can the user define a specific scheduler that provide the work stealing?
yes, as round_robin_ws already does and the class might be a blue print
> Could you show an example of a specific algorithm?
class round_robin in the library
> How portable is the priority if it is specific of the scheduler?
sorry - I don't get it. inside a thread the fibers are running the semantic
of a priority is the same (because you have only one scheduler dealing with
if you refer to migrating a fiber between threads (e.g. between
fiber-schedulers) the interpretation of priority depends on the semantics
of priority in the fiber-scheduler
the fiber was migrated to.
> I'm sure I'm missing the role of the scheduler. what are the propose of
> the virtual functions.
> I have the impression that it implements a lot of things none of them
> related to scheduler. It seems to me that it is the class that is calling
> to the scheduler that schedules. What am I missing?
> I'll continue once I understand what the scheduler algorithm purpose is
please look at my previous email - it contains a rough explanation of
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk