Sorry, but there was a fairly awful typo in the previous message. See below;
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org]On Behalf Of scott Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 10:44 AM To: 'Boost mailing list' Subject: RE: [boost] Re: [Threads] Simple active object
<snip>
Finally, having deployed (SA) ActiveObjects I would be disappointed to see any new mechanism for thread communication. Proof of a successful implementation of SA (IMHO) would be that it became the _only_ mechansim for inter-thread communication. Of course, in the real world, this is not going to happen but I would offer it as a noble intent :-)
I tentatively suggest that the ActiveObject that most of us want is the AA variety.
should have been SA (symmetric activation) not AA
We can see the objects exchanging the Method Requests in a symphony of optimal operation - in our heads. But between our heads and the "tools at hand" I believe the symphony becomes something else, primarily due to AA-based environments and associated culture.
Cheers, Scott