Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] How to drop the formal empty state
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-27 00:17:08

Niall Douglas wrote:
> >> As you'll note, the first possible state (empty) tends to be chosen by
> >> the compiler as the most likely. That implies a 20 cycle branch
> >> misprediction cost for each of the valued or errored states. So they
> >> are equally costly, which is intentional.
> >
> > Wait a minute. Are you saying that you consider the fact that valued and
> > errored are equally slow a feature, instead of one of them being fast?
> > How is that a good thing? Of course empty should be the least likely -
> > it _is_ the least likely.
> As I've mentioned several times already in other threads, that was a
> deliberate and intentional design choice for outcome/result. Predictable
> latency throughout.

That's an intriguing statement.

Now I know that you usually know what you're talking about, so perhaps you
can provide a bit of further explanation.

If we take a typical example - your AFIO function from earlier - it issues
at least three syscalls, every one of which has different latency when it
succeeds or when it fails, and in addition, later ones are skipped when an
earlier one fails, and to top all that off, the last syscall is an fsync,
which does not inhabit the same galaxy as the words predictable latency.

So what use case are we targeting here where success and failure are equally
costly and measured in cycles?

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at