search

JeffGarland / liaw2019-process

Repository for initial drafting of boost.process standards paper
MIT License
5 stars 4 forks source link

Revision 2 #67

Open klemens-morgenstern opened 3 years ago

klemens-morgenstern commented 3 years ago

Revision 2 proposal - removed pipes and implemented extensible IO.

klemens-morgenstern commented 3 years ago

@JeffGarland Waht do you think about removing pipes? I know I was the one resisting that in the past, but it seems to me there is no way to get pipes with C++23, but maybe a process lite could do it.

klemens-morgenstern commented 3 years ago

Everything is implemented in a sloppy, untested and probably buggy way, which isn't compiling on MSVC anymore. Should be a proper start for reference: https://github.com/klemens-morgenstern/process/commit/74dcc3d2f5dceb7c6234bc371b7524518b471e3c

klemens-morgenstern commented 3 years ago

Also we must discuss #63 before merging.

JeffGarland commented 3 years ago

@JeffGarland What do you think about removing pipes? I know I was the one resisting that in the past, but it seems to me there is no way to get pipes with C++23, but maybe a process lite could do it.

I see 3 ways we could go.

  1. Leave them and see what happens -- LEWG could just ask us to remove them -- it's been pretty close already on that -- we could offer the option and see what they say.
  2. Put them in a different paper -- the problem there is if we specify using them then we'd need both anyway
  3. drop them and simplify

At the moment if we can drop them and get basic functionality I think that would be the best way. It would obviously be much simpler and we might have a shot at c++20. With networking/executors and all that stuff as a top priority -- and the likelihood that there may only be 2 face to face meetings before 23 is cut means that the easier our stuff is to actually get it -- and then we can add to it in 26. Note I did ask the LEWG chair in the last week if he thought it was worth it for us to pursue this for 23 given all the work and he said yes.

JeffGarland commented 3 years ago

I've done the 10 minute scan of the changes -- will look more latter, but the general direction looks good. Looks like you already pulled the pipes...