>I'd rather have different ThreadPool instances for different 'names'.
>
> importantThreadPool.dispatch( aRunnable );
> backgroundThreadPool.dispatch( anotherRunnable );
I doubt that it would be a good idea to try to "outwitt" the OS's
taskmanager w/r to clever allocation of processtime.
The only exception might be for realtime-critical applications but
even then I doubt it would be clever to implement it on such a high
level.
I'd rather allow an optional "priority" parameter but even this one
should only be very rough (as in HIGH, NORMAL, LOW, IDLE).
This would remove the potential need for a multiplexer to distribute
resources as well and thus keep things simpler.
Best,
Michael
--
Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
Michael Gerdau email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Windows NT: No Thanks. Not Trusted, Not Today, Not Tomorrow.
PGP-keys available on request or at public keyserver
