| Issue 23: | does InvocationManager need a full-blown stack? | |
| 1 person starred this issue and may be notified of changes. | Back to list |
I've realized that InvocationManager doesn't really need a Stack. It is simply pushing/popping one item. I've written a version where InvocationManager simply holds an Invokable. All the tests pass. This seems simpler to understand and will be somewhat faster. It will also be easier to lock down for thread-safety, if we choose. Is there any reason to use a Stack? e.g. for future design/features?
Nov 26, 2011
Project Member
#1
codeto...@gmail.com
Summary:
does InvocationManager need a full-blown stack?
Nov 29, 2011
yeah, I have been pondering that ever since I put it in. If you have a simplification, then go for it.
Nov 29, 2011
Sounds fun... I'm on it
Status:
Started
Nov 29, 2011
I've introduced InvokableState which is a simple wrapper around a pointer. Quite minimalist, though not thread-aware. Tests for InvocationManager pass untouched and new tests for InvokableState.
Status:
CodeComplete
Nov 29, 2011
Looks great.
Status:
Fixed
|