Re: [Boost-users] Subject: Formal Review of Proposed Boost.Process library starts tomorrow

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Subject: Formal Review of Proposed Boost.Process library starts tomorrow
From: Boris Schaeling (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-14 19:11:20

On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:29:57 +0100, Jeff Flinn  
<TriumphSprint2000_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> [...]In the attached zip, I've updated the windows executor  
> implementation to
> [...]The posix executor would remain string agnostic.

Can you describe when I would like to use the Windows or POSIX code of the  
library? I ask as this code has obviously not the goal of being  
platform-independent. What's then the goal?

- If I want to use system-specific features, I could access system APIs  
directly (as I think I have to use #ifdefs anyway?).

- If it should be easier to create child processes, the Windows or POSIX  
code is either a subset or a reinvention of the system API? Then I either  
have to call system APIs at some point again (if I need access to more  
features) or I have to learn a second API which does the same as the  
system API? Furthermore, the rationale for the design would need to depend  
on system APIs and not on generic code (for example a generic executor  
doesn't necessarily mean there should be a Windows and a POSIX executor).

- If I want to easily switch from generic to system-specific code and the  
library wants to help me: Where is the right trade-off between Windows and  
POSIX code which is as similar as possible to generic code and Windows and  
POSIX code which provides access to all platform-specific features a  
developer could be interested in?

Boris

> [...]