================
@@ -227,7 +265,7 @@ class ThreadPool {
class ThreadPoolTaskGroup {
----------------
GeorgeARM wrote:
So the way I see this is:
I have a public API that looks like:
```
virtual void asyncEnqueue(std::function<void()> Task, ThreadPoolTaskGroup
*Group) = 0;
// or similar
```
My thoughts:
* `ThreadPoolTaskGroup` implementation is actually internal to the `ThreadPool`
* `ThreadPoolTaskGroup` being passed to the API but only used internally as
just a UID. No member functions being called internally. Moreover, the object
definition itself is a RAII wrapper on top of the ThreadPool API implementation
so I find that this is an unnecessary circular dependency and coupling.
* Uniqueness is `guaranteed` through memory addressing. Someone can `break`
uniqueness when going through the public `ThreadPool` API.
* Type safety; sure you don't have implicit conversions going on.
What `guarantees` to you uniqueness is essentially when you use RAII wrapper
itself and the fact that calls at termination: ` ~ThreadPoolTaskGroup() {
wait(); }` which will go through; process the tasks and erase the group from
the `ActiveGroups`.
So what I think is that passing instead of passing `*this` you can convert the
address to a string/int and pass this instead.
Eitherway, please ignore my comment if it doesn't make sense; as said not
familiar with the codebase. I just find strange a bit this aspect of the API.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82094
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
