RE: [boost] Re: Re: Threads & Exceptions

From: Pete Becker (petebecker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-06 08:22:44

At 08:48 AM 8/6/2002 -0400, Moore, Dave wrote:
>I think the idea of parameterizing the return value has merit on the
>"syntactic sugar" side of things, as the user doesn't have to create their
>own boost::function just so they can extract a return value - they can still
>pass simple function pointers.

Function pointers are a C solution, not a C++ solution. Rather than beefing 
up the C solution, I suggest a more object-oriented solution: a class with 
a member function that runs in a separate thread. These have been around 
for years, dating from long before the days of Java:

class thread
{
public:
         thread();
         ~thread();
         void start();
private:
         virtual void run() = 0;
};

Derived classes can hold whatever data they need. When the thread finishes, 
the object's data can be examined to get the result. (Of course, thread 
would have more member functions than I'velisted, in order to be able to 
query the status of the thread)

        -- Pete

Dinkumware, Ltd.
"Genuine Software"