Re: [boost] [fiber] ready for next review

On 12/5/2015 11:18 AM, Oliver Kowalke wrote:

2015-12-05 15:03 GMT+01:00 Agustín K-ballo Bergé :

...

On 12/4/2015 11:48 AM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:

...

On 12/4/2015 4:47 AM, Oliver Kowalke wrote:

...

2015-12-03 22:21 GMT+01:00 Agustín K-ballo Bergé

...

:

Yes, in the documentation.

...

documentation might need some updates - my announcement was primarly focused to the source code

Fair enough, I was misguided by the "ready for next review" subject as well as the announcement that requests from the review have been addressed. This is obviously not the case, but we can still make a lot of progress based on source code adjustments only.

I found an unusual pattern in the code, where memory is allocated via an allocator's `allocate` but afterwards `construct` is side-stepped and placement new is used instead. This breaks proper allocator support. Curiously `destroy` is correctly used down the line.

Furthermore, from a cursory look it seems C++11 allocators are not supported. The code assumes a C++03 allocator interface. If it is intentional then this requirement should be documented.

it is not an ordinary allocator - it's a 'stack allocator' placement new is used to allocate the control-structure on the fiber-stack (instead on using new -> heap)

I was actually referring to `promise` and `packaged_task`. Is that the case there too? If that means an argument whose type is `Allocator` has stronger requirements than those expected by the standard library it should be documented accordingly. Regards, -- Agustín K-ballo Bergé.- http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com