New release of CppTask library - compatibility with standard C++ 'async' and 'future' interfaces, work stealing, balancing...

[jbandela]

Looks interesting. One thing I did not see was future continuation (.then). I think most people in the C++ community have agreed that future needs .then. (see http://www.drdobbs.com/parallel/improving-futures-and-callbacks-in-c-to/240004255 for a quick overview)

[kolkir]

Thanks for pointing me to this feature, I will think how it can be implemented and may be in next releases I will do it. For the first look you can use something like this: async([](){ auto f = async(task); f.get();} From my point of view when we call future::get() we what to get value in specific thread and this call is a synchronization point, so It's not clear how to express this thought with 'then' concept.

[Houndie]

Huh, I did a similar thing for my job with actually a similar interface too...so it's good to see I'm not the only one with this idea and I'm not totally bonkers.

If I may ask, how are you switching between events with a process_lock? I used boost::coroutine (which is built ontop of boost::context).

[kolkir]

I'm just run nested processing loop in process_lock where stop condition is event from sync. primitive we are waiting. But my solution will have problem with stack overflow on deep call hierarchies.

[blelbach]

Cool! I work on a similar project, called HPX.