Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [threadpool] new version - interface suggestions
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-16 12:19:48

----- Original Message -----
From: <k-oli_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [threadpool] new version - interface suggestions

> Hello,
> > Task class
> > * Adding a get_future function allows to use wait_for_all and wait_for_any
> > or overload these functions for tasks.
> I would prefer to keep future as an implementation detail

I understand your concern, but what about overloading wait_for_all and wait_for_any for tasks, this will preserve the implementation detail but give to the user a generic way to wait for the completion of N tasks?
This will allow also to submit a task once a set of tasks have been finished, something similar to your old chained_submit, isn't it?

As the specialization will be partial we will need to define wait_for_all and wait_for_any using an auxiliary class until all the compilers support partial specialization of functions. I'll suggest this to Anthony.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at