From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-30 11:27:55
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday 30 May 2008 06:23 am, Anthony Williams wrote:
> Given wait_for_any and wait_for_all (see my latest revision), I don't
> think we need these more complex composite classes in many cases, and
> where we do they might be better implemented specifically for the case
> at hand.
One problem is wait_for_any is not sufficient to implement an efficient
scheduler. You have to copy all the futures into wait_for_any so each
wait_for_any call is O(N). So something like the future_selecter (should be
spelled future_selector?) class I mentioned earlier would still be needed.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk