Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alisdair Meredith (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-18 18:40:17

Gennadiy Rozental wrote:

> 1. Does not Boost.Thread already have locking mechanisms
> 2. IMO any locking mechanisms should be implemented in terms of smart_ptr

I don't see the fundamental connection between locking and smart

In particular, which smart_ptr are we talking about? shared_ptr [which
may need locking internally for reference count anyway]
or shared_ptr?

Why should locks be dynamic rather than stack allocated at all? I'd
have though stack-allocation far more intuitive?


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