Re: [boost] [threadpool] new version - interface suggestions

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.

Best,
Vicente