Le 23/04/15 02:49, Konrad Zemek a écrit :
2015-04-23 0:32 GMT+02:00 Vicente J. Botet Escriba
: Le 22/04/15 14:28, Konrad Zemek a écrit :
I would expect that the program must take care of the lost of communication and do a set_exception on the promise before the promise is destroyed. However, the call to wait_for seems to be a good hint that the user knows what is doing. I could consider that any call to a timed wait function disable blocking. An alternative could be to have a way to request to don't block. Please let me know if one of these options would take in account your use case. Either of these options would work for me, as I could emulate a "don't block" request with a call to future<>::wait_for(0). I'd prefer the latter to the former though, if only because it fits my needs better and it would make it more explicit that future's behavior is modified.
Please don't forget to add a Track ticket, so that we don't forget this feature request. Best, Vicente