[boost] Re: Lock unification [move]

From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-22 13:37:20

Howard Hinnant wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your comments and patience.  There's a new spec up at:
> 
> http://home.twcny.rr.com/hinnant/cpp_extensions/threads.html
> 
> I've tried to incorporate those comments I've agreed with, and explain 
> my disagreements below.  Further discussion would be much appreciated.  
> I feel there has been dramatic improvements in this first iteration of 
> the spec.  Thanks again!
> 

<snip>

The scoped_lock assignment operators make me a bit nervous. For 
instance, you don't specify what this should do:

Mutex mut;
scoped_lock< Mutex > l1( mut ); // lock once
scoped_lock< Mutex > l2( mut ); // lock twice (recursive)
l1 = move(l2); // ???

If I had to guess, I suppose this would have the effect of simply 
unlocking l2. Or should it throw? I would prefer the former if I had to 
choose, but the specification should be clear on this point.

Oh, and thanks for your work on the spec Howard. :-)

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