Asger Ottar Alstrup wrote:
Angus Leeming wrote:child::process_demultiplexor::instance().flush();
process_demultiplexor and flush are strange names, which I do not
[...complicated explanations for complicated names...] >
Make sense now?
Those are terrible names, still.
child::process_monitor::instance().poll();
is better, but you are so bright, you must be able to come up with something better than that. Use a word which people know, rather than cook up some fancy word which you have to google for and read pages to understand.
If necessary, use a couple of words, rather than one complicated.
Or, in the language of Alexandrescu, use Policies to parameterise the process_data class.
Yeah, you can do that, but while that is very flexible, that is also complicated. YAGNI and KISS applies.
In general, yes. For example, you might imaginge a "command line parser" that creates a process_data variable out of this little lot:
"foo bar > outfile 2>&1 < input"
(Have I mentioned that I've written such a beast ;-)
As we say in Denmark right now: Top nice.
I read elsewhere that paternity leave is now at an end. It's been fun having you around so much.
So sure. With a VS.NET setup, it is much easier for me to dip in from time to time, so expect the odd patch from time to time.
Regards, Asger
