From: Marcus Lindblom (macke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-10 10:18:09
Peter Dimov wrote:
> As an aside, does anyone have a success story about active objects? I can't
> seem to grasp their significance; in particular, how are they supposed to
> scale to many cores/HW threads if every access is implicitly serialized?
I don't know if this applies directly, but I've recently looked at
Intel's Thread Building Blocks and I must say I'm quite impressed how
they've handled things. (It's free to download for evaluation, see
Their library is solely aimed at parallellizing cpu-limited algorithms
to many cores, by means of a task scheduler and some nifty
breath-first/depth-first evaluation schemes.
It's different from the concept of an 'active object' which may reside
on different threades/processes/cpus/machines/planets, but I think it
could be one direction to think of in terms of futures and how they
spawn recursively to create job objects that are handled by a
thread-pool (typically one thread per core).
The two problems are a bit different, but I just thought I should
mention it here as I liked it a lot and I think a boost-ish
implementation of something similar would be of great value to the world.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk