On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver Kowalke <oliver.kowalke@gmx.de>wrote:
What kind of changes have been needed to make it possible to implement coroutine and generator?
the context class, which holds a pointer do context_base class, is now transformed to a template (e.g. Signature as template arg) but still holds a pointer to context_base class which did not change. I'm using the 'curiously recurring template pattern' for the interface generation.
I see 3 valid alternatives here: * You provide it as sub-library coroutine of context. * You request for review a separated coroutine proposal. * You rename your context library as cooperative/context and add the cooperative/coroutine, cooperative/fiber, ..... This will need at least a mini-mini review to change the goal, the name and the directory of the library. This alternative would not prevent to request less formal review or formal ones if you find it useful. I would prefer a change the top level namespace to cooperative in this case.
OK - I would rename boost.context to cooperative/context. How should this mini-mini review take place? Do I've to ask on the mailing list or would be the conclusions of this thread enought?
I think if everyone is aware of the reorganization and no one objects, a (mini-)* review maybe wouldn't be necessary? Maybe send personal emails to those involved in the Context review to ensure they're aware of any proposed changes? - Jeff