[boost] Re: Boost.Threads: Do we need all those mutexes?

Howard Hinnant <hinnant@twcny.rr.com> writes:

...

but that's a bit too much of a handholding for my taste, and doesn't allow us to use mutex() in the Effects clauses. The kind of a person that would delete lock.mutex() would never get a multithreaded program correct anyway.

If we expose either a Mutex* or a Mutex&, and we standardize a public Mutex interface (with lock(), unlock(), etc.), then we are saying that one can call functions on the pointer or reference returned by mutex(). And now that I write that sentence my skin is beginning to crawl. ;-)

Why not just build a mutex identity object that wraps a pointer? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com