Alex Rousskov <[email protected]> writes: > On 01/28/2013 03:29 PM, Rainer Weikusat wrote: >> so easy that even using the STL implementation wouldn't be worth the >> effort > > Can you clarify why we should not just use one of the STL queues > instead?
I agree with your opinion that "the STL doesn't contain an 'obviously good' choice for a priority queue implementation in the given context". [...] >> the event scheduler will store a value at the >> pointed-to location which can be passed to eventDelete to cancel a pending >> event 'safely' in logarithmic time, meaning, even if the event was >> possibly already put onto the async queue. > > I cannot find the patch code which would make canceling an async queued > event work. I see that eventDelete deletes ev_tag, but I do not > understand how that will cancel the event if it is already in the async > queue. Did I misunderstood what you meant by "cancel a pending event > already put onto the async queue"? [...] The purpose of the eventDelete routine is not to cancel a call the event scheduler already put onto the async call queue but to prevent such a call from being put onto this queue if this is still possible. And I didn't intend change that.
