Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RFC to design a unified oneDPL approach to asynchrony #1916

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Jan 13, 2025

Conversation

akukanov
Copy link
Contributor

@akukanov akukanov commented Oct 22, 2024

The proposal aims at designing a consistent approach to asynchronous execution that would be utilized by various APIs of oneDPL, such as asynchronous algorithms and dynamic selection.

Update: the decision was made not to proceed with the proposal, the PR is now for wrapping up and archiving.

The associated discussion: #1917

@akukanov akukanov added the RFC label Oct 22, 2024
@akukanov akukanov changed the title RFC to design a single oneDPL approach to asynchrony RFC to design a unified oneDPL approach to asynchrony Oct 23, 2024
@akukanov akukanov marked this pull request as ready for review December 19, 2024 14:12
danhoeflinger
danhoeflinger previously approved these changes Dec 30, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@danhoeflinger danhoeflinger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, This reflects our conclusion and reasoning to reject a productized general API, and also describes the context and how we got to that decision.

Copy link
Contributor

@vossmjp vossmjp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree this should be archived.

@akukanov akukanov merged commit a1aaf97 into main Jan 13, 2025
1 of 2 checks passed
@akukanov akukanov deleted the rfcs/general-async-api branch January 13, 2025 19:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants