Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Fibers] Performance
From: Nat Goodspeed (nat_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-21 10:09:16

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Niall Douglas
<s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 20 Jan 2014 at 19:48, Hartmut Kaiser wrote:


> That's a good paper, but I wish it didn't claim to be a *universal*
> model for asynchronous operations because that model is completely
> unsuitable for persistent storage i/o. I had that argument with
> Nicholas @ Microsoft Research actually, and I think I may well have
> persuaded him as they're seeing the same problems of fit.

Niall, would you be able to propose a more universal model? Please
read this as a simple invitation rather than a challenge. The goal of
the paper seems laudable: accepting an argument that allows the caller
to specify whether to provide results with a callback, a future or

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at