On 3/6/07, Steven Watanabe <steven@providere-consulting.com> wrote:
AMDG
Jason Turner <lefticus <at> gmail.com> writes:
<snip>
You should not store a pointer you should store a value. If users need a pointer then they can specify it explicitly.
active_object::active_object<TestClass> ao;
I agree, in principal, and it was my original intention. However, a design goal was to make sure that any existing class could work with active_object and your above example does not allow for a specific constructor to be called. I guess, however, now that I think about it, if the user needs to call the not-default constructor he can store a pointer.
The << operator is not appropriate. A function is better
ao.execute(boost::function1<int,TestClass *>(&TestClass::getInt));
You could use operator() but that might still be confusing.
ao(boost::function1<int,TestClass *>(&TestClass::getInt));
Ideally you want
a0->getInt();
But this is not possible. Another possibility is
(ao->*&TestClass::getInt)();
I also considered something along the lines of: ao->(&TestClass::getInt); What is your thought on that?
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
-Jason