Am Saturday 28 February 2009 10:43:10 schrieb vicente.botet:
If I understand then we will have two function win the same name in different namespaces. Does ADL found the good one,i.e. if the user see boths overloadings, will wait_for_all(f1, f2) call the the future overloading and wait_for_all(t1, t2) calls the task overloading or do we need to prefix with the namespace?
I suggest to prefix it - but I could also rename the threadpool specific ones
Well the question is, what happens if the condition don't retuns true? The task doing this will be blocked, but only this task. The worker thread will continue to schedule other tasks, of course testing each time this condition. It seems to me a good compromise.
This is already provided by the task wait functionality (wait(), get() etc.). If task::get() or task::wait() would block because the associated future is not ready the worker thread automatically reschedules, e.g. executes other items from the pool channel. I think a explicit reschedule_until() is not required and dangerous. tp::task< int > t1( boost::this_task::get_thread_pool< pool_type >().submit( boost::bind( & fibo::par_, boost::ref( * this), n - 1) ) ); t1.get(); // rescheduling if t1.get() would block == until t1.get() would nont block other items from the pool channel are executed. regards, Oliver