Subject: Re: [boost] [process] Formal Review starts today, 27 October
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-27 16:19:49
On 27 Oct 2016 at 20:33, Klemens Morgenstern wrote:
> Well for the reason statet above I think this API design is the best
> solution; it has very little to do with backwards-compatibility, I broke
> nearly everything there. But as statet in our last discussion: I'd be
> really interested in how you would design that.
Something like https://godbolt.org/g/38C0KH maybe.
The point I'm trying to make is that a child process class ought to
be as primitive as possible. Absolutely build *layers* of additional
fancy stuff on top. But the core base class should be something
simple, easily subclassable to extend by users.
Get the basics right first, THEN add the unnecessary stuff on top.
That way you don't encumber your users with stuff they don't want nor
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk