Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But I >>still insist<< ( ;-) ) on a rather simple interface > for creating a thread object (that shall kinda-"encapsulate" > that "async_call<T>"-thing "representing" the thread routine > with its optional parameter(s) and return value... and which > can be canceled [no-result-ala-PTHREAD_CANCELED] and timedout- > on-timedjoin() -- also "no result" [reported by another "magic" > pointer value]): > > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D5D59A3.E6C97827%40web.de > (Subject: Re: High level thread design question) > > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D613D44.9B67916%40web.de > (Well, "futures" aside for a moment, how about the following...) > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ;-) ;-)
Hmm, good point. If we are going to get results back in this straightforward way we probably ought to be thinking about exception propagation also. However, that's a *much* harder problem, so I'm inclined to defer solving it. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
