From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-19 04:21:26
Jon Biggar wrote:
> Russell Hind wrote:
>> Ok, but what happens if locking an already locked mutex where
>> undefined behaviour? This isn't this the same as the smart_ptr case?
>> Who knows how the actual implementation is on all the platforms, or
>> future platforms?
> Um, wasn't the question throw vs assert? In either case we would detect
> the attempt to relock the lock and not do that.
Yes it was, you wrote that smart_ptr asserted because that was better
than dereferencing a null ptr so my question/point is why throw rather
than assert because locking an already locked mutex (as Peter pointed
out) is undefined behaviour. Similar results in the end so why assert
in one and throw in the other? Why not throw in shared_ptr then?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk