Re: Capy Review

Vinnie Falco wrote:
> *The interop problem*
> 
> Without a shared protocol, N coroutine libraries need N*(N-1) adapters.
> With a standard protocol for environment propagation, one bridge covers
> everyone. IoAwaitable is our proposal for that protocol. Capy is the
> testbed. The papers (P4172, P4092, P4093) are the standardization path.

Apologies if this is a redundant question as I'm new here, but what's wrong with the interop protocol standardized in C++26 via P2300?

We already have std::execution::get_stop_token and std::execution::get_scheduler (which are analogous to but different from the stop token and executor members in the proposed IoAwaitable); my own paper, P4223, directly inspired by Vinnie et al's work on Capy, proposes std::execution::get_frame_allocator. I suspect that the interop problem would be greatly ameliorated if Capy made use of the existing, standard context-sharing protocol, no?

Ian
_______________________________________________
Boost mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://lists.boost.org/mailman3/lists/boost.lists.boost.org/
Archived at: https://lists.boost.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/BOHWGRA7Y46ONRT5A4Z2R7RIQKLGNRO7/