Le 2023-11-09 16:21, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost a écrit :
On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 11:00 PM Julien Blanc via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
(1) template<asio::cancellation_type Ct = asio::cancellation_type::all, non_empty_range<awaitable> PromiseRange> awaitable left_race(PromiseRange && p);
How is `non_empty_range` defined?
range<awaitable> is already pseudo-code, so i'm not sure why you ask. But you're right, i've been mislead by the current doc. I was going to reply that it could at the very least be defined as: template<typename T> concept non_empty_range = std::ranges::range<T>; // self-documenting alias. Gives opportunity for future improvements However, this is not what we want here. What we want here is a non_empty range of<awaitable>. So i believe the correct documentation should be non_empty_range_of<awaitable>. Of course, it's still pseudo-code. This makes me rises the concern about using pseudo-code in the documentation, without telling so. Especially with features the reader might not be familiar with, such as concepts and coroutines, which . Maybe there should be a convention across the documentation to differentiate between valid c++ code and pseudo-code (pseudo-code is useful for clarity in certain situations). In all cases, i think that a misleading pseudo-code is a documentation bug that should be fixed. A library targetting c++20 should not misuse the "range" name. Best regards, Julien