Boost logo

Boost :

From: Nicolas Fleury (nfleury_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-04 14:53:52

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Nicolas Fleury wrote:
> [...]
>>Would it be possible to post some code that "experience has shown" to be
>>error-prone using semaphores comparing with conditions/mutexes?
> Sure... thanks to the Microsoft Corp.
> Take a look at their brain-damaged "metered section" semaphore
> implementation. Note that MS "auto-reset event" is nothing but
> a binary sema (well, brain-dead "pulsing" aside for a moment).

Thx for the link, but I don't get it. How is Microsoft implementation
of semaphore is showing that all implementations of semaphore should be
avoided? Using semaphores versus using mutexes/conditions should be
illustrable with few lines of code. I just want to understand what some
developers think is error-prone about semaphores, whatever the
implementation (or with the removed boost implementation).

Nicolas Fleury

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