From: simon meiklejohn (simon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-13 06:34:27
Hello Oliver
>I've made some modifications because defer_pool::stop was not waiting
>for finishing all work items if thread_sleep was removed in your
>examples.
>- defer_pool : work items are queued into a thread pool; if
> defer_pool::stop returns, all work items have been processed
The omission was intentional - though your implementation
with deactivating the queue improves things significantly.
>- defer_thread : each work item is processed in a new thread; threads
>are never joined (call and forget)
>I believe that only defer_pool needs a list of work items.
>defer_pool with one thread in the pool should be mimic your
>implementation of defer_thread. So I would use defer_thread in a
>create-and-forget manner.
yes, that makes sense.
Thanks for your input. I'll put the combined results up in the vault soon.
An interesting time to be boosting!
Simon