Em seg., 18 de ago. de 2025 às 17:12, Christian Mazakas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> escreveu:
An Asio with far fewer templates and built entirely around coroutines would be a very compelling competitor.
I'd be interested in this. However I don't think this would be a direct competitor to ASIO. ASIO is interesting precisely because it's customizable so it can get integrated into projects that have wildly different needs from one another. An "ASIO" built entirely around coroutines wouldn't be far from some sort of Boost.Fiber2. The design would be massively simplified, and the only changes from Boost.Fiber would be: * Boost.Fiber1 fibers don't take IO into account, and this translates into a design that only lacks **one** feature: cancelling active fibers (IO might never finish so vocabulary to express this little need is a big deal). Meaning: if Oliver Kowalke accepts the change for adding this single feature, we don't even need Boost.Fiber2. Boost.Fiber design is stable, and stability is in itself a huge deciding factor. I don't have the time to upgrade all my ASIO-dependent projects every time ASIO breaks the API, and ASIO always breaks the API every few years. * A scheduler that takes kernel-notified IO events into consideration (e.g. Windows overlapped IO, Linux epoll & io_uring, FreeBSD kqueue, ...). -- Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira