Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.Sync] no master branch?
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-16 12:44:22
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Eric Niebler <eniebler_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 01/15/2014 02:06 PM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>> ... decoupling from the time units is desirable because (a) in many
>> cases you don't need time units with synchronization yet you still
>> introduce dependency on Boost.Chrono and Boost.DateTime
> But in many cases you *do* care about time (e.g. wait with a time-out).
Yes, but why should these cases impose a mandatory dependency? I don't
want to pay for that when e.g. I just need a mutex to synchronize
> How will you present a unified, consistent interface when you can't
> express some fundamental operations?
>> and (b) there is no way to use use e.g. std::chrono with
>> Boost.Thread without manually converting to Boost time units.
> This sounds like a failure of generic design to me. There should be a
> Duration concept, and the APIs should work with any concrete type that
> models that concept. That would also solve the dependency problem, since
> the actual concrete types don't need to be mentioned.
It's a little more complicated than that because Boost.DateTime and
Boost.Chrono implement different interfaces (as well as Boost.Thread
wrt different time units). But basically, that's what "decoupling"
means and what Boost.Sync does.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk