[boost] Re: A new boost::thread implementation?

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-08 13:12:42

< repost [with repaired link] >

Peter Dimov wrote:
[...]
> > Another alternative might allow all of the following:
> >
> >     async_call<int> f(create_thread(), bind(g,1,2));
> >     int r = f();
> >
> >     async_call<int> f(thread_pool(), bind(g,1,2));
> >     int r = f();
> 
> Using an undefined-yet Executor concept for the first argument. This is not
> much different from
> 
> async_call<int> f( bind(g, 1, 2) );
> // execute f using whatever Executor is appropriate
> int r = f.result();
> 
> except that the async_call doesn't need to know about Executors.

Yep. 

http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/concurrent/dist/docs/java/util/concurrent/ThreadExecutor.html

But I >>still insist<< ( ;-) ) on a rather simple interface 
for creating a thread object (that shall kinda-"encapsulate" 
that "async_call<T>"-thing "representing" the thread routine 
with its optional parameter(s) and return value... and which 
can be canceled [no-result-ala-PTHREAD_CANCELED] and timedout-
on-timedjoin() -- also "no result" [reported by another "magic" 
pointer value]):

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D5D59A3.E6C97827%40web.de
(Subject: Re: High level thread design question)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D613D44.9B67916%40web.de
(Well, "futures" aside for a moment, how about the following...)
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ;-) ;-)

regards,
alexander.