From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-08 16:44:19
Alexander Terekhov <terekhov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 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]):
> (Subject: Re: High level thread design question)
> (Well, "futures" aside for a moment, how about the following...)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ;-) ;-)
Hmm, good point. If we are going to get results back in this
straightforward way we probably ought to be thinking about exception
propagation also. However, that's a *much* harder problem, so I'm
inclined to defer solving it.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk