From: Braddock Gaskill (braddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-11 12:45:53
Here is another question/comment as I move through this implementation:
I see a strong need for future<void>.
If I build my multi-threaded task scheduling system around future, I will
likely have some invocations which do not return a value, but which I do want
to synchronize with, receive exceptions from, and possibly cancel().
Has there been any work/thoughts how to handle this? Should future<void> be allowed?
Thanks for the other info Peter and your implementation - very useful.
Dockside Vision Inc
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk