From: Scott Woods (scottw_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-12 23:14:47
Hi Aaron (Rabid Dog?),
Read your post with interest. An observation relating to the outlined
The demultiplexor that requires all waitable services to expose their
handles (sounds positively pornographic); does it have to be that
In the work by D. Schmidt (already referenced by J. Garland) that
describes Active Objects there is an object (i.e. instance of a particular
class) that is pretty much equivalent to a thread. There may be a
variety of these objects (instances of types derived from a common
base "thread" class) in a running process.
Each Active Object Scheduler (AKA demultiplexor or reactor) waits
on 1 or more waitable services and translates the related events into a
generic event that may be routed anywhere in the process.
If a Scheduler is created around a troublesome waitable service (i.e.
one that refuses to expose its handles), doesnt this achieve the uniformity
across asynchronous activity that you are pursuing?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk