From: Christopher Kohlhoff (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-18 19:55:18
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> The question would be whether there will be (or whether there
> already is) a "generic" active object implementation? We've
> found that Boost.Asio's io_service is a good scheduler/queue
> and using a futures wrapper for the result types.
An alternative to having an io_service per active object is to
have multiple active objects share a single io_service (would
these be called "semi-active objects"?).
If you also use a strand per active object, then the active
objects can even share an io_service with a thread pool calling
io_service::run(). The strand will ensure that the operations
for a single active object don't execute concurrently.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk