[concurrency-interest] Waiting for object value to be available.

Aleksey Gureev spyromus at gmail.com
Tue Aug 23 10:16:21 EDT 2005


Maybe I will sound a bit stupid, but why not using a bounded queue for
tasks. It looks like a classical multiple providers vs. multiple
consumers problem. The consumers are sleeping while there's no object in
the queue. When provider puts an object, first consumer gets awaken and
takes the object into processing.

If you think that it matches your scenario I can give you a short sample
on demand.


Aleksey Gureev
Noizeramp Creative Group
Home: http://www.noizeramp.com/
Blog: http://blog.noizeramp.com/

On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 16:00 +0200, Peter Veentjer - Anchor Men wrote:
> I have used Futures but if understand them correct they are meant for
> the completion of tasks. And my implementation is not based on the
> completion of tasks. 
> Maybe you could elaborate on your suggestion. And please keep in mind
> that the value wrapper will be updated many many times.. A Future only
> completes once..
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at altair.cs.oswego.edu
> http://altair.cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest

More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list