coost VS concurrencpp

You may also see it on github.

coost is a cross-platform C++ basic library with both performance and ease of use. It is like boost, but much smaller, the static library built on linux and mac is only about 1MB in size. Although small, it provides enough powerful features:

There is an interesting story about cocoyaxi and Xmake.

I happened to achieve a nice implement in cocoyaxi (co for short) today. It is easy to define a flag with an alias in co:

Hey everyone, here is a go-style coroutine library in C++11, Could it help?

Is it this one? (link was missing)

I am using concurrencpp for my project. What I like about it is that it's basically a thread pool factory with coroutines. It allows for better structuring / organizing of multithreaded work. So for me the main advantage of coroutines is that the code looks easier to follow

Equivalent concurrencpp code:

I agree. I use concurrencpp for the exact use case you described - coroutines running on simple-to-understand-executors which return some asynchronous pipe for communication.

If you look at concurrencpp, you can control exactly where and how coroutines are resumed, using executors.

concurrencpp. Modern concurrency for C++. Tasks, executors, timers and C++20 coroutines to rule them all.

Just use a good third party library like concurrencpp .

Hi, I am looking for a header-only C++14 (or lower) quality thread pool. Ideally, it would be similar to BS::thread_pool but in C++14. Most of them I find on GitHub are bloated (e.g. concurrencpp) or have many open Issues. Ideal usage would be similar to:

I use concurrencpp for my asynchronous code and the repo is written in modern cpp, with tests, sanitizers and what not.