Re: [boost] Active objects?

From: Jason Hise (chaos_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-01 13:35:56

Jason Hise wrote:

>Reece Dunn wrote:
>
>>Active objects would be very hard to do *automatically* since the object is 
>>a thread (very neat concept), with the constructor, methods and destructor 
>>being processed as messages to the object's thread.
>>
>The main obstacle in making them work automatically is the desire to 
>give them familiar syntax.  If the desire to call methods directly can 
>be overlooked, it seems perfectly possible to offer a generic solution.  
>A simplified declaration for active <> might look something like this:
>
>template < typename Type >
>struct active : private Type
>{
>    active( [...] );
>
>    template < typename ReturnType [, ...] >
>    future < ReturnType > enqueue( ReturnType (Type::*func) ( [...] ) [, 
>...] );
>};
>
Another thought: to make the constructor and destructor queueable 
actions, instead of deriving from Type, active < Type > could contain an 
aligned_storage of sizeof ( Type ) and construct/destruct Type in place.

-Jason