Re: [boost] Monad (was: Re: [Boost-users] [afio] Formal review of Boost.AFIO)

Subject: Re: [boost] Monad (was: Re: [Boost-users] [afio] Formal review of Boost.AFIO)
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-27 11:05:11

> > The idea is that no one ever need implement the Concurrency TS
> > themselves ever again. Just pick up a copy of Boost.Monad/Outcome.
> > Write your policy class for your custom variant. Profit.
> 
> Is anyone besides Boost or standard library vendors actually interested in
> doing this? Standard library implementors are not going to take a
> dependency
> on a Boost library.
> 
> For example: Are there many (or any) Filesystem TS implementations that
> people care about outside of standard library implementations and Boost?

I'd be interested in using this for HPX if and only if:

a) the implementation gave us a benefit in terms of performance and/or
memory requirements, without making things worse in one direction or the
other (which I can't judge at this point, I have no data)
b) the implementation was 100% conforming (which we know it currently isn't)
c) the implementation quality was adequate (which I can't tell as I have not
looked)

Regards Hartmut
---------------
http://boost-spirit.com
http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu