Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber review January 6-15

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
<vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Why do Boost.Fiber need to use Boost.Coroutine instead of using directly
> Boost.Context?
> 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.