Re: [boost] [thread] locks.hpp double declaration ofunique_lock(unique_lock&& other)

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] locks.hpp double declaration ofunique_lock(unique_lock&& other)
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-21 13:27:25

:(
Sorry,
Vicente
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frank Mori Hess" <frank.hess_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] locks.hpp double declaration ofunique_lock(unique_lock&& other)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 21 January 2009 12:06 pm, vicente.botet wrote:
> Hi in lines  248-255 of the file boost/thread/locks.hpp we found the
> unique_lock(unique_lock&& other) declaration twice one withoth explicit and
> defined and the other with explicit an undefined.

FWIW, the declarations are different: the second takes an upgrade_lock, not a 
unique_lock.

> #ifdef BOOST_HAS_RVALUE_REFS
>         unique_lock(unique_lock&& other):
>             m(other.m),is_locked(other.is_locked)
>         {
>             other.is_locked=false;
>             other.m=0;
>         }
>         explicit unique_lock(upgrade_lock<Mutex>&& other);
>
> Could you say me why this is nesded?
> _____________________
> Vicente Juan Botet Escribá
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJd2be5vihyNWuA4URAlLKAJ0bQe5cCCdP50N8wb09AbyHMR0/RgCg6NWR
6rOZWbQF6oIcEdgLeu2v85k=
=qZP8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost