On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Boris Schäling
While Klemens made some changes to the version I handed over to him and made his own steps forward, I helped him avoiding making steps backwards.
Boris, I believe you're saying that Boost.Process 0.6 is just as extensible as your 0.5, and that I should stop worrying about that point. Thank you. However there are two points that still bother me: * Klemens says that the dynamic-container-of-initializers idea will not work in Process 0.6. I'm not sure why. Process 0.5 initializers also used templated executor arguments; it's true that the any_initializer adapter had to state a specific executor type. (I had distinct windows vs. posix any_initializer types.) Nonetheless any_initializer could still be used with any templated initializer type. Isn't that still true? * Klemens states that the machinery needed to write custom initializers is currently in the detail namespace. I want it to be promoted out of the detail namespace: I want support for custom initializers to be a documented, supported feature of the library. If the library is not yet "done" in that respect, then let's consider it again when it's more fully baked. That's what the "IF" in my YES, IF means.