Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber mini-review September 4-13

On 09/04/2015 09:08 PM, Oliver Kowalke wrote:

2015-09-04 21:14 GMT+02:00 Thomas Heller :

Could you please elaborate a bit why non-allocating futures wouldn't

...

require a mutex? Or more generally, a execution context suspension/yield mechanism?

I mean no std::mutex (pthread_mutex) is required. a protocol, utilizing atomics, between future and promise does the job - http://blog.forecode.com/2012/05/23/a-non-allocating-stdfuturepromise/ in 'void promise::set_value(R && r)' boost::this_fiber::yield() could be used, if the future is not ready yet (e.g. AS(future->state, 0, 'R') fails).

The problematic portion in std::mutex/boost::mutex is exactly the missing mechanism how to yield in the correct way. Even if you implement a mechanism like in the blog post you mentioned, the problem hasn't been solved.

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost