Re: [boost] [c++std-parallel-2020] Re: We need a coherent higher level parallelization story for C++ (was [thread] Is there a non-blocking future-destructor?)

14 Oct
2015
14 Oct
'15
2:57 p.m.
Lawrence Crowl wrote:
This is absolutely backwards. Future was always intended to be used as a generic future value. Hence the name, and the existence of 'promise'. Extending it beyond these design goals in order to imbue it with a lifetime management function caused the problems.
3464
Age (days ago)
3464
Last active (days ago)
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Peter Dimov