[concurrency-interest] "Best practice" for ThreadPool creation/run-down

Peter Kovacs peter.kovacs.1.0rc at gmail.com
Tue Jan 8 17:07:49 EST 2008


On Jan 8, 2008 7:33 PM, Matthias Ernst <ernst.matthias at gmail.com> wrote:
> > But there is this assimmetry which bugs me:
>
> In such a case I've always found it helpful to get rid of the implicit creation
> and  introduce symmetry: have the application initalize your API, inject
> that object where needed and tear it down after usage.

This is definitely the solution most appealing to me personally. The
reason why I am trying to find the least intrusive solution possible
is that the library already has a number of existing users, and we'd
like to introduce the performance improvements through concurrent
execution without adding to perceived complexity -- the motivation is
actually a mixture of trying to be simple and backward compatible.
Also, we have an extensive and convoluted API which makes it
challenging to find a good place for documenting such
"infrastructural" features. (Meaning that the current structure of the
documentation is poor enough to make this a challenging task. :-) [or
should I rather make a :(- ])

Thanks
Peter

>
> Matthias
>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list