2014/1/8 Hartmut Kaiser
One of the main questions arising for me when looking through the code is why doesn't the fiber class expose the same API as std::thread (or boost::thread for that matter)?
I thought is does expose the same interface (with some small additions) as std::thread does. Could you point out what you are missing or what are the differences your are not comfortable with?
This would make using fibers so much more usable, even more as the rest of the library was aligned with the C++11 standard library.
it was my intention to make boost.fiber usable as std::thread/boost::thread
In fact, in my book a fiber _is_ a thread-like construct
agreed
and having it expose a new interface is just confusing and unnecessary.
can be more specific _ I thought boost.fiber has a similiar interface as std::thread/boost::thread