Future cancellation

Bill Frantz frantz at pwpconsult.com
Thu May 2 05:40:13 PDT 2013

On 5/1/13 at 5:43 PM, frantz at pwpconsult.com (Bill Frantz) wrote:

>On 5/1/13 at 1:37 PM, jackalmage at gmail.com (Tab Atkins Jr.) wrote:
>>Ah, I'm not proposing that we augment the base Future class with
>>cancellation properties.  I explicitly used the term "subtype" in the
>>quoted bit above.  *Some* of Ron's suggestions were to augment the
>>base Future class, but not all of them, and several other people
>>pushed back on that.
>I think that covers the issue.
>Cheers - Bill

Upon further reflection, I think the point about premature 
standardization stands.

Also, a pure inheritance model -- which is implied by 
subclassing -- may be the wrong model. If one wants to include 
POLA in one's programming style, one will probably want to 
separate the authority to access the resulting value from the 
authority to abort the computation.

Cheers - Bill

Bill Frantz        | gets() remains as a monument | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506      | to C's continuing support of | 16345 
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com | buffer overruns.             | Los Gatos, 
CA 95032

More information about the es-discuss mailing list