Re: [boost] [thread] RFC standard proposed mutex, read-write mutex, condition

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-22 18:29:47

Howard Hinnant wrote:

> And all of the sudden the above code is no longer legal.  If the code
> is legal with one constructor, what is it that makes the code a logic
> error **100% of the time**, instead of a fixable exceptional
> circumstance when using the second constructor?

By using the constructor that takes a mutex argument, I have specifically 
and intentionally said that it is a logic error for this condition to be 
used with another mutex. That's the whole and only purpose of the 
constructor, to express this intent of mine.