> From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 08:37, Greg Steuck wrote: > > > > What would you recommend me to do? I could have another > pool in my app > > but that would be ugly. > > Hmmm ... I think Berin this because he did not want to couple > against the old > pooling code that requires Poolable etc.
True. > It may be a good idea to cleanup all that code and reduce its > coupling to old > pool stuff. We can leave compatability layers in there so people can > gracefully migrate from it or when mpool does not offer > everything we need > (like ResourceLimiting pools). Sounds good. MPool has two versions of bounded pools. The FixedSizePool fails quickly when there are no more elements for the pool. The BlockingFixedSizePool will block for a period of time until a new resource has been made available. Essentially, I have placed the essential features of the ResourceLimitingPool into two separate classes--each with their own purpose. It does reduce complexity of the individual classes, but I am sure there are tradeoffs. > We could also fix up those spelling mistakes ;) +1 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
