On Mar 7, 2010, at 2:47 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
"Daniel Larimer" <dlarimer@gmail.com> wrote in message news:A46E676B-59BA-4117-879E-7FE391255B21@gmail.com... [...]
Talking with my employer, I am gaining support for eventually open sourcing a lot of this! As far > as I have been able to google, I have not found any system that does what I describe above.
I take it that you are not familiar with Clik++:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-cilk
or QuickThreads:
Nope. And I searched just about everything I could think of to describe corporative multi-tasking and user threads. Found lots of stuff, but not those. The intel library looks interesting in that it is the most cross platform, where as quickthreadprogramming.com mentions Windows 7 but says nothing about linux/g++. As nice as those libraries are, they still fail to achieve my desired syntax: struct SomeServantClass { int width(); int height(); int calculate_area(int w, int h); }; IDL_STUB( SomeServantClass, IDL_BASE, METHOD(width), METHOD(height), METHOD(calculate_area) ) actor<SomeServantClass> a; future<int> w = a.width(); future<int> h = a.height(); future<int> area = a.calculate_area( w, h ); future<int> area34 = a.calculate_area( 3, 4 ); Where the tasks are all "automatic" and under the hood. SomeServantClass could be ANY existing class without modification. Also, area34 would be realized before area because w and h must be evaluated before the first calculate_area can be scheduled, where as the second can be scheduled immediately instead of weight on other futures. I suppose I could build my scheduler / active objects system upon one of those libraries. Boost.task looks the most promising from what I have seen. I guess for what I am doing, these higher level task abstractions attempt to do "too much" and I would essentially be using them as an implementation of coroutines. I don't want my users to be thinking about threads, locks, wait conditions, yielding, scheduling, etc. I want them to operate on a much higher level.