From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-31 11:30:37
--- In boost_at_y..., Jeremy Siek <jsiek_at_c...> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, bill_kempf wrote:
> willia> Making lock() operations easily accessible is likely to
> willia> newbie mistakes. Not exposing them at all makes it
> willia> difficult/impossible to extend the library, such as with a
> willia> concept.
> Whatever mechanism we decide on, the name should indicate the fact
> newbies shouldn't use it. For example, mutex_access_private might
> good name.
> How about make this a wrapper class with member functions that
> the real mutex, and this wrapper class is declared as a friend by
> real mutex classes.
I've already done that much. The lock.hpp file defines a lock_ops
class that does precisely this, though it's in detail land instead of
exposed in the public interface.
The real issue here is actually how to interact with
boost::condition, however. I can't quite see how to document this
well enough in the public interface to allow for mutex extensions
that work with the condition variable.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk