Re: [Boost-users] Why is boost::thread::mutex noncopyable?

From: me22 (me22.ca_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-01 13:21:00

On 01/01/06, Phil Endecott <spam_from_boost_users_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I disagree with the first comment: "The only logical form of copy would
> be to use some sort of shallow copy semantics in which multiple mutex
> objects could refer to the same mutex state."  What's wrong with the
> copy of a mutex being a new independent mutex?  (There's a problem if
> you copy a locked mutex, but I don't propose to do that.)
>

I think that would be more confusing, personally, since it wouldn't be
making a copy.  With non-copyable you get a compiler error if you try
to copy it; with a do-nothing copy things would compile but not copy
any sort of state or behaviour, which a copy would intuitively be
expected to do.

- Scott