Re: [Boost-users] [Thread][win32, msvc] Mutexes

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Thread][win32, msvc] Mutexes
From: Frank Mori Hess (fmhess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-28 13:16:35

On Sunday 28 September 2008 04:29, Anthony Williams wrote:
> No. boost::mutex is a lightweight mutex. It has slightly different
> performance characteristics than CRITICAL_SECTION: it is intended to
> be "better" than CRITICAL_SECTION.
>
> > If not so, what's the reason for boost::detail::lightweight_mutex to
> > exist ?
>
> I think it's a historic artifact from versions of boost.thread prior
> to 1.35.0 when boost::mutex required linking to the thread library,
> which allowed mutexes to be used in header-only boost libraries.

I didn't realize boost::mutex was header-only now.  I recently put a 
modified version of detail::lightweight_mutex (conforming to the 
Boost.Thread Lockable concept) into thread_safe_signals svn.  I wanted 
header-only, plus it compiles to no-op when thread support is disabled/not 
present.  Unfortunately, I also had to add a little unique_lock fill-in 
because boost/thread/locks.hpp still requires linking, due to the 
definition of the lock_error exception.