Re: [boost] Re: Aaron's Informal Proposal for a Universal Demultiplexor for Boost

From: Carlo Wood (carlo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-14 16:43:00

On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 03:32:06PM -0500, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
> > This is what I assumed, but he has a point here.  You (Aaron) propose a
> > class basic_multiplexor, shouldn't that be basic_demultiplexor?
> 
> Yes.  However, the difference between a demultiplexor and multiplexor is
> not entirely obvious to me in this context.  (We could invent one, if it
>  were valuable, but I don't think it is).  I just like short names. :)

A multiplexor is something with many inputs and one output.
A demultiplexor is something with one input and many outputs.

I think demultiplexor is the most obvious because this thing
has many outputs: All the different event handler.  The single
input might be considered to be the single system call in which
the thread is sleeping, or just the single 'demultiplexor'
object itself.

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo_at_[hidden]>