Re: [Boost-users] [signals] thread_safe_signals feature-complete

From: Timmo Stange (ts_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-17 15:26:39

Frank Mori Hess wrote:

> It's to compensate for the fact that it is not called in the constructor, 
> which I originally tried.  If it's not called before the first 
> dereference, then you might try to execute an invalid slot.  If it's not 
> called before the first increment, then you might not increment past the 
> first slot.  I got rid of the call in the constructor because it killed 
> concurrent invocation, due to the iterators still in scope in operator() 
> holding locks to the first slot.  However, since I optimized it to only 
> create temporary iterators when passing them to the combiner, I could 
> probably just put the call back into the constructor.

I'd say the combiner must always check for an empty range and the
comparison of first and last will always ensure a valid position, or?

Regards

Timmo Stange