From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-26 21:57:57
On Oct 26, 2006, at 9:52 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:
> Thanks, I'll try this tomorrow. Later today, I mean.
I'm an old man. I can't deal with your hours. :-)
> BTW... why do you count the upgradable among the readers? It seems
> a bit
> simpler not to include it in the reader count; it already has a bit
> all for
I found it simpler to include the upgradable in the reader count. It
has been a year or two since I made that decision so, you know, times
change, sometimes we get smarter (sometimes not). At the time: an
upgradable lock is a reader. It doesn't become a writer until
someone asks it to, at which time it decrements the reader count and
waits at gate 2. YMMV.