Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: >> >>>> Robert Collins wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 02:13, Max Bowsher wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> If we do add a class, it should probably be a thread class from which >>>>>> all of our threaded tasks can derive. Regardless, I don't see that any >>>>>> further cleanup will reverse these changes. I can see how it may >> involve changing >>>>>> the same lines to a third form, but that is not a reversal. >>>>> >>>>> Are you thinking of the (IIR the name C) the 'completion object' >>>>> pattern? That would work too. >>>> >>>> I have no idea what this means. >>> >>> It's "Gang Of Four"-speak, though I'm not sure this is actually original >>> Gang Of Four, i.e. "Design Patterns: Elements Of Reusable >>> Object-Oriented Software" by four guys and a foreward by Grady Booch. >>> I don't recall running across it in there. >> >> I think Rob might have meant the "Asynchronous Completion Token" pattern: >> <http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/PDF/ACT.pdf> (first Google match). This >> is definitely post-GOF. > > Seems like a lot of work to go to just to eliminate a global variable.
Thankyou! It seems appropriate to point out that I have never read any design patterns books. Max.
