Re: [Boost-users] [boost] Boost.Fiber mini-review September 4-13

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 5:08 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:

...

Le 04/09/15 20:37, Nat Goodspeed a écrit :

...

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:

...

Please could you recall us what "not in the present form" meant as a result of the review and what has been done to overcome these issues? http://lists.boost.org/boost-announce/2014/01/0393.php

I have not yet tried to address those point by point. I don't understand then why are we doing the mini review now, before you check that any point has at least tried to be addressed. Sorry. How about these points:

Performance: Oliver has not only worked to improve performance, he has included and documented performance tests you can run on your own hardware. Great, I will check. See below. Documentation: The documentation now contains several new sections explaining how to use the library for interesting/common use cases. New examples are presented and documented. See below.

API: The API has been aligned more closely with std::thread. C++14 is not only supported but required. Move-only callables are supported. Variadic parameters are supported. std::chrono is more generically supported. Channels now support value_pop(). fiber_group has been dropped. Migrating fibers between threads has been dropped. See below. That said, of course, it is up to each reviewer to state for him- or herself whether s/he believes that the Fiber library should become part of Boost. In particular, regardless of what Oliver or I might synopsize, it is up to each previous reviewer to decide whether his January 2014 objections have been addressed. To be clear, I believe that by respect to the reviewers you should take

Le 05/09/15 16:27, Nat Goodspeed a écrit : the review summary you wrote and add a comment for each point. Best, Vicente