Re: [Async] Peer review report and conditions

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-10-11 18:29:49

On 11/10/2023 19:02, Richard Hodges via Boost wrote:

>> If I were designing that API, I'd personally provide a user supplied
>> callable which gets invoked to decide on the tie break, and I'd default
>> its implementation to one choosing randomly. Then users can choose
>> whatever suits them, and no need for left_xxx() functions etc.
> 
> This is probably why it’s best I stick to hacking together trading systems.
> 
> Wouldn’t it be difficult to default the argument to prefer_left() or similar though, given that the parameters are a variadic pack of sources?
> 
> Not having a default would be unacceptable to me as it would involve:
> - more typing, and
> - having to read the documentation prior to hacking the code together.

I guess it depends on what you're used to, but in principle I have no 
idea with convenience wrapper functions which save obtuse syntax for a 
base implementation function.

You can design APIs to take variadic packs of variadic packs if you 
want. I actually have an API like that in my work code base, I couldn't 
think of anything less worse, so I went with it.

Niall