Thorsten Schuett wrote:
On Tuesday 01 November 2005 20:11, Peter Dimov wrote: [snip]
However, the active lambda stuff could possibly be done as an extension of Boost.Lambda using Spirit/Phoenix sugar:
future< int > = active<>[ _1 = _1 + 2 ];
This doesn't work; your active<> doesn't take any arguments, so you can't use _1. It is possible to make this:
future<int> f1 = active( bind( f, 1, 2 ) ); future<int> f2 = active( bind( &X::f, &x, 1, 2 ) );
What is the point of adding the active-Wrapper? The bind already returns a nullary function.
future<int> f1 = bind( f, 1, 2 );
should be sufficient.
'active' is not a wrapper, it's a function taking a function object and returning a future. I haven't looked at your 'future' design too closely (if at all) but I think that what you call 'future' is a future and an executor rolled into one. In the "classic" design a future is a passive result holder and the actual computation of the result is done by the executor. A future by itself does not spawn any threads and doesn't even know about threads. It's a "ticket" for a future value that you can "redeem" at some point.