Re: boost.spawn: review requested

From: Oliver Kowalke (oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-11-29 21:49:38

Niall Douglas via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> schrieb am Mo., 29. Nov.
2021, 21:47:

> On 29/11/2021 20:38, Oliver Kowalke via Boost wrote:
> > Am Mo., 29. Nov. 2021 um 21:30 Uhr schrieb Niall Douglas via Boost <
> > boost_at_[hidden]>:
> >
> >>
> >> As an alternative, how about announcing the complete removal of
> >> Boost.Coroutine with two major release notice (including this release)?
> >> That should spur Boost.ASIO being upgraded to Boost.Coroutine2.
> >>
> >
> > That had already happen some years ago - including warnings during
> > compilations - but didn't help. Ask Vini...
> > At the end I was forced to remove the compiler (preprocessor) warnings.
>
> Alas I'm probably one of the very few here who would be absolutely fine
> with removing completely Boost.Coroutine after two major releases, and
> whatever didn't fix itself and broke with that sufficient amount of
> warning well that's on them in my book.
>

I think this not a good idea... boost::asio:::spawn() seams to be often
used.

I assume there's no way you can shim Coroutine's API into a Coroutine2
> implementation, then you can drop Coroutine2
>

> Unfortunately no, boost.coroutine is C++03 while boost.coroutine2 requires
> C++11.