From: Johan Torp (johan.torp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-02 13:01:16
Frank Mori Hess wrote:
>> > My use case requires future_value.
>> I generally try to follow the future-related discussions, but do not
>> seeing an explanation of the specifics of your use case. Can you please
>> point me to one?
> Oh, my use case is the "lifting of an ordinary function to an asynchronous
> that takes/returns future_value objects" I mentioned earlier in the post.
> be more specific:
To clarify some of my posts and another use case; I have been thinking a lot
about a lazy "passive function" which is rather analogous to an active
function. The difference is that evaluation work is not done by an
associated thread, but by a future-listening thread in it's wait, get or
In general any function:
R foo(A1 a1, A2 a2)
can be "lifted" to a passive or active function if any of it's arguments
needs to be supplied asynchronously. This can be done either totally;
future<R> foo(future<A1> a1, future<A2> a2)
future<R> foo(future<A1> a1, A2 a2)
I hope that futures will be enough computationally powerful to implement
"passive lifting" and that it won't be too cumbersome for users to express
-- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Updated-version-of-futures-library-tp17555389p17606122.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk