From: Roland Schwarz (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-30 06:22:39
Anthony Williams wrote:
> Windows named mutexes do give you exactly this functionality, though as they
> are kernel objects you don't get the "fast path" options of a roll-your-own
> If the name for your mutex includes the process ID and &afoo, then Windows
> will give you a distinct mutex for each distinct foo object. You need the
> process ID, so you don't get a clash with mutexes in other processes, since
> named mutexes are system-global.
Yes, of course. I already mentioned that the idea might sound all to
trivial. A similar mutex also exists e.g. on linux.
You are pointing at the similarities.
But I want to show the differences. In my case I simply use the
standard" process-local mutex, but wrapping it into a "name-generator".
In this respect my "idea" is different from op-sys named mutices.
op-sys mutices are always system global aren't they? (Given the name is
Consequently my approach gives you a fast-pathed mutex if you need it,
without loss of the "named" feature.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk