Subject: [boost] pipeline concurrency proposal (was: Is there any interest in a library for actor programming?)
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-28 15:14:46
Nat Goodspeed wrote:
>> I think the *right* design would be a concurrent equivalent of
>> generic programming, where the only fundamental building blocks
>> should be a well-designed statically typed SPSC queue, move
>> semantics, a low-level thread launching utility (such as
>> boost::thread) and a concise generic EDSL for the linking of nodes
>> with queues. All further abstractions can be built on top of those
>> ingredients (a bit like the STL is built on top of templates). It
>> should allow me to do something like this:
>> start(readfile(input) | runlengthenc | huffmanenc | writefile(output));
>> At some point I want to publish a proposal for a library that does
>> exactly this, but I need to find more time to work on it. The good
>> news is that all necessary ingredients appear to already exist with
>> C++11, Boost.Proto and Boost.Lockfree.
> [OT, sorry...]
> Julian, are you familiar with this pipeline proposal?
No I wasn't! Thanks a lot for making me aware of it.
It is almost exactly what I had in mind, except that the authors seem to not have realised the full generality of the approach. This worries me. Has the proposal progressed far towards standardization already?
If I want to react to this proposal so that the standards committee knows about it, what should I do?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk