Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-users] [afio] Formal review of Boost.AFIO
From: Andreas Schäfer (gentryx_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-24 01:37:25
On 17:59 Sun 23 Aug , Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2015 at 18:42, gentryx_at_[hidden] wrote:
> > >Niall, Ahmed, it will be very difficult to review this library as it
> > >has
> > >dependencies on libraries that are not adopted by Boost. The
> > >documentation is full of references to both libraries APBind and Monad.
> > >
> > >If they are internals, no mention should be done on the documentation.
> > AFAIK Monad is visible to the user as AFIO functions return them.
> Correct. I summarise everything you need to know about monad<T> on
> the first page of the tutorial
Which links to , a link that yields a 404. Via  and  I found
. Is that the current documentation of Monad? In "Complexity
guarantees" some of the minimum complexities exceed their maximum
counterparts (e.g. "51 opcodes <= Value transport <= 32 opcodes").
What's that supposed to mean? What is the rationale behind citing
minimum complexities? And why do you measure opcodes instead of, say,
Since you mentioned monads were basically identical: why don't you
just use std::future?
-- ========================================================== Andreas Schäfer HPC and Grid Computing Department of Computer Science 3 Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany +49 9131 85-27910 PGP/GPG key via keyserver http://www.libgeodecomp.org ========================================================== (\___/) (+'.'+) (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk