Re: defer call

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-06-13 08:54:14

--- In boost_at_y..., larsbj_at_l... wrote:
> Douglas Gregor <gregod_at_c...> writes:
> 
> 
> | In the above case, using defer_call would be a mistake because it 
is
> | going to  
> | require the overhead of a virtual call and prohibit what 
otherwise could be 
> | inlined _very_ well.
> 
> mmm... My main reason for trying out the defer_call has to do with
> thread creation (shown), and also with defering calls to be executed
> in another thread (I forgot to mention that):
> 
> void some_foo(locked_queue<defer_holder> & que)
> {
>         while (true) {
>                 defer_holder dh = que.pop();
>                 (*dh)();
>         }
> }
> 
> 
> void bar() {
>         ...
> }
> 
> int main() {
>         locked_queue<defer_holder> queue;
>         thread_handle th = create_thread(&some_foo, queue);
>         defer_holder dh = defer_call(&bar);
>         queue.push(dh);
>         ...
> }
>         
> 
> So the boost::function<> or the object returned from bind need to be
> packaged somehow to be able to pass it through a queue.

Bind should not do this, as it's an orthogonal concept, as pointed 
out.

> So perhaps a "defer_call" that packages function objects with
> operator()() would be more suitable for Boost.Thread or boost in
> general?

Boost.Function already does this (I assume you're confused about this 
because there are no virtual methods in boost::function<>, but trust 
us, Boost.Function is a "deferred call" model).

Bill Kempf