17 Sep
2009
17 Sep
'09
6:32 a.m.
Young, Zachariah L escribió:
Actually, why lock the m_check_mut at all?
Why not delete that whole thing and remove the m_check_mut from the class entirely, as it apparently exists only to synchronize the get and set of m_command on line 177 (before any edits), which is an atomic compare-and-set (ie, doesn't need synchronization)?
-Zach
I reach the same conclusion just a minute ago. Could you test your code removing this mutex? Best, Ion