Subject: Re: [boost] Synchronization (RE: [compute] review)
From: Thomas M (firespot71_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-31 16:14:38
On 31/12/2014 20:32, Gruenke,Matt wrote:
> I feel like this issue has been receiving a disproportionate amount of focus. Most users of Boost.Compute will probably never use one of these constructs. Also, no one has yet closed the door to wait_list- or command_queue- level equivalents. I'm simply not going to write them. And even if they aren't eventually added to the library, you can still define them in your own code.
> Honestly, I'm much more concerned about #2. While we argue over levels of convenience, that looming issue of exception safety still casts a long, dark shadow over the high level interface of Boost.Compute and its users.
Ok let's settle this issue.
When you implement #2, and yes that's certainly a complex task, please
compile a thorough list when the library can't ensure exception safety
on it's on and share it here; we can then take a new look at the
full-scale problem and think of an interface. Is that ok?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk