[Boost-users] Re: You provide gun, I provide foot.

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-07 10:47:08

"C. Michailidis" <dinom_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Quoting from 
> http://www.boost.org/doc/html/threads/concepts.html#threads.concepts.mutexes
>
> "Many C++ threading libraries use a pattern known as Scoped 
> Locking[SchmidtStalRohnertBuschmann] to free the programmer from the need to 
> explicitly lock and unlock mutex objects. With this pattern, a Lock concept 
> is employed where the lock object's constructor locks the associated mutex 
> object and the destructor automatically does the unlocking. The Boost.Threads 
> library takes this pattern to the extreme in that Lock concepts are the only 
> way to lock and unlock a mutex object: lock and unlock functions are not 
> exposed by any Boost.Threads mutex objects. This helps to ensure safe usage 
> patterns, especially when code throws exceptions."
>
> Unfortunately, I actually WANT to shoot myself in the foot this time and 
> Boost.Threads won't let me!!!  I can understand ENCOURAGING users to write 
> safe code, but forcing them to is outright fascist!

Nobody's forcing you to use the library ;-)

> My problem is that I have existing code which I would like to make more 
> portable by using Boost.Threads.  Now, this wouldn't be a problem except for 
> the fact that I'm (effectively) dealing w/ a COM object that already has its 

You can dynamically allocate lock objects, or you can dynamically
construct them using boost::optional.

HTH,

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com