[boost] Re: Boost.Threads: Do we need all those mutexes?

From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-08 11:41:32

Peter Dimov wrote:
> 
> We _are_ considering alternate designs now. As part of this effort I asked:
> 
> 
>>>>>>This is certainly possible, but I don't see what the additional
>>>>>>complexity buys us.
> 
> 

My apologies. You had directed that statement at one of Mike's designs, 
so I didn't think it was directed at mine as well. Let's see ...

1) a reduction in interface complexity.
   - one lock class, instead of a scoped_lock, try_lock, timed_lock, etc.
   - no bools or enums in constructors; instead, there are clearly
     named factory functions for customizing lock construction.

2) You can initialize a lock in the condition of an "if" statement.

3) You can return a lock from a function. (Benefit is debatable.)

That's it, I think.

-- 
Eric Niebler
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com