Boost logo

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]>

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at