Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] Is there interest in shared_lock_prioritized?
From: Antony Polukhin (antoshkka_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-20 08:46:35

2013/2/20 Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>:

> Fredrik Orderud is working on a templated version (See [Threads-devel]
> Extend shared_mutex with support for priority policies?) "shared_pri_mutex"
> with support for the following prioritization policies:
> IIUC, your approach is dynamic, that is, it the user that choose the
> priority while locking, while IIRC his approach is static, that is, the
> priority is given by the type of mutex, preserving in this way the
> boost::shared_mutex interface.

You are right, Fredrik Orderuds solution is better because it does not
break existing interface. It is incapable of making multiple lock
queues of different priorities:

shared_lock_prioritized<10> lock;

// thread #1
// Lock with minimal priority

// thread #2

// thread #3
// Will acquire lock before #2,
// if #2 did not already acquire lock

However user usually do not need such functionality, so it does not
worth breaking API.

Best regards,
Antony Polukhin

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at