Re: [Boost-users] Does anybody interested in active object pattern?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Does anybody interested in active object pattern?
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-07 11:18:23

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:05 AM, joel falcou <joel.falcou_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 07/11/10 16:51, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>>
>> But what you're describing is not the active object pattern. ;)
>> An Active Object is an object that:<snip>
>
> Oh my bad :o

No worries. :D

> then again, can't we have an Active Object taking care of an future result
> of computation and
> have it spawn itself other AO working on subpart ?
>

Yeah, but that would be wasteful. You can make the active object do a
fork-join implementation internally if you have lots of data to work
on.

Typically tough, active objects are great for things like a log sink
-- where the sink just takes in all the log entries and serializes
them to be written in batches -- or for RPC handles. Think more like
if you represented a remote machine/resource through an object, you'd
want to have the I/O and all the mutations to be done in a
serialized/sequential/synchronized manner.

HTH :)

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
deanberris.com