Boost logo

Boost :

From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-30 12:20:59

--- In boost_at_y..., "davlet_panech" <davlet_panech_at_y...> wrote:
> Hi,
> It seems that the current implementation of some Boost.Threads
> classes violates it's concept requirements, for example, here's how
> condition::wait() looks like:
> template <typename L>
> void wait(L& lock)
> {
> if (!lock)
> throw lock_error();
> do_wait(lock.m_mutex);
> }
> Type L is supposed to implement ScopedLock concept, which, unless I
> am mistaken, doesn't mention anything named `m_mutex'. Am I missing
> something here?

Not exactly. The m_mutex parameter is a private parameter, and thus
not part of the concept requirements. It's an implementation detail
requirement. If an implementation for a given platform can be coded
with out this requirement there's nothing wrong with that.

However, I can see problems with someone trying to extend the library
with their own Mutex and ScopedLock variants that they want to work
with boost::condition, and this sort of implementation detail
prevents this. So, there may be a small flaw in the design.

Anyone have any ideas about whether we should do something about
this, and if so, what?

Bill Kempf

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at