Hi boosters, My name is Moncef Mechri (aka "fireboot" on IRC). I'm a 20 years old french student in my final undergraduate year at the Faculté des Sciences de Luminy, Marseille, France. I would like to apply as a student for the Boost.Process SoC idea. My main domains of interest include C and C++ programming languages, system programming (especially on POSIX systems), parallel computing, generic programming, object-oriented design, software optimizations, graph theory, and UI development (using Qt). So far I've used a couple of boost librairies : Boost.Thread, Boost.Random, some features from Boost.Interprocess (principally atomic operations), Boost.SmartPointers, Boost.Foreach and Boost.Bind. They were all a pleasure to use and it's why I've just written a (french) paper about one of them : Boost.thread [1]. I'll would be glad to help improving the set of high quality libraries that Boost is. I have some ideas to help finishing Boost.Process and I'd be happy to hear your opinions about them: 1) Abstract the string type used to name executables. This could be done for example using a traits class 2) Move find_executable_in_path() and executable_to_progname() to Boost.Filesystem. I think their job is filesystem-related so maybe it would be wise to move them accordingly. 3) On POSIX systems, provide raise(3) and kill(3) functions to respectively send a signal to the current process and send a signal to a child. Sending signals to unrelated process should probably not take place in Boost.Process but rather in Boost.Interprocess 4) On POSIX systems, when a process dies it becomes a zombie process until wait() is called. Since wait() blocks, things may become tricky if there are a lot of child process. When a process die, the SIGCHLD signal is sent to his creator. It might be nice to use that by setting up a SIGCHLD signal handler which calls wait() when this signal is received. Since a similar problem exists on Windows, Boost.Process should provide a similar solution on this platform, but I've not yet thought about a possible design for it. It might be also useful to provide a way to activate/deactivate this feature, for example with a macro BOOST_MANAGES_DEAD_PROCESS 5) Right now, boost::process::wait_children() returns the first exit code which is not equal to EXIT_SUCCESS, and if there are more than one process which finished abnormally, return values of those child processes are ignored. I think we could improve that by returning for example a vector<boost::process::status> instead of just one boost::process::status. Doing that, we can retrieve all the status codes. It might be useful to define a way to toggle on/off 6) Actually in Boost.Process, if the developer wants to be able to do asynchronous operations on Windows he has to define the BOOST_PROCESS_WINDOWS_USE_NAMED_PIPE macro. By doing so, it makes Boost.Process on Windows create named pipe for all streams even if asynchronous operations are not used in all of them. First of all I propose to add a boost::process::anonymous_pipe class to Boost.Process, and a boost::process::named_pipe class to Boost.Interprocess (because named pipe can be used between unrelated process). After that the developer should be able to choose between anonymous pipe or named pipe on a per-stream basis (but of course asynchronous operations will only work on streams using named pipes). Thanks for reading, it'd be nice if someone accept to comment my ideas Moncef Mechri. [1] http://fz-corp.net/?p=505