Re: [Capy review] Beyond I/O
Steve Gerbino via Boost <[email protected]> Mon, 06 Jul 2026 16:04:04 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <W5eOm17tYzmoDhh7o-91SW7cBpCx_aqybmS__EvWNEWjmTQQhpZF41wrcVo9QJu3kZjkODZqTlNCA5415STWyEPRXn_gP6bQyQ1JIX_H748=@gerbino.co> |
On Monday, July 6th, 2026 at 5:44 PM, Mateusz Fila via Boost <[email protected]> wrote: > In particular, the name `IoAwaitable` suggests a close association with I/O, whereas the protocol actually describes a convention for sharing an execution context that is independent of I/O and can be applied to arbitrary asynchronous operations. A name that reflects this more general role might better communicate the abstraction that Capy provides. Your use-case really highlights the need to give more thought to the naming of the protocol. It would seem to be far too narrow. > --- > > Verdict > > I vote ACCEPT. I really appreciate you taking the time to review the libraries and share your real-world implementation experience, especially because it homes in on the capability of Capy outside of I/O. I found it very valuable. Thank you, Mateusz. _______________________________________________ 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/AHNKL5O2WFYH43YP2IXTDGL3H6BKEPCV/