Hm depending on the way the pool is used, it might be a better default
to have the number of threads equal the number of cpu cores. In my
experience the control thread is mostly either waiting for tasks or
processing messages and blocking in between so it rarely uses a full
core, wasting the available computation time in this case.
However, I'm not really sure if it is like this for the majority of all
applications or if there are more cases where the control thread will
continue to do computations in parallel. Maybe we could collect some
opinions on this?
On another note, I would like to see a rough description on what the
default workUnitSize is depending on the size of the input. Otherwise it
feels rather uncomfortable to use this version of parallel().
Another small addition would be to state that the object returned by
asyncBuf either is an InputRange or which useful methods it might have
(some kind of progress counter could also be useful here).
Btw., sorry if anything of this has already been discussed. I have
missed the previous discussion unfortunately.
Sönke
