Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber review January 6-15
From: Nat Goodspeed (nat_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-11 13:50:27
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba
> Why do Boost.Fiber need to use Boost.Coroutine instead of using directly
> It seems to me that the implementation would be more efficient if it uses
> Boost.Context directly as a fiber is not a coroutine, isn't it?
Correct, a fiber is not a coroutine.
Oliver is also bringing a proposal to the ISO C++ concurrency study
group to introduce coroutines in the standard. Interestingly, he is
not bringing a context-library proposal: the lowest-level standard API
he is proposing is the coroutine API. But is the coroutine API
low-level enough, and general enough, to serve as a foundation for
higher-level abstractions such as fibers? You might regard the present
fiber implementation as a proof-of-concept.
Oliver asserts that using the Coroutine API rather than directly
engaging the Context API has only trivial effect on performance.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk