"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Matt Hurd wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:31:18 +1000, Batov, Vladimir <vladimir.batov@ca.com> wrote:
How 'bout
scoped_lock lk1(m, defer); scoped_lock lk2(m, try);
no comment except that perhaps scoped_lock can be dropped for just lock. scoped_lock seems so twentieth century ;-)
I like scoped_lock because of:
scoped_lock<> lock( m );
I prefer to be able to name the lock variable 'lock' instead of 'lk'.
Suit yourself, but I think variable names should denote roles, not types. The type declaration is already there, and otherwise you end up with glorified hungarian. When there's really no suitable role, some one or two character identifier works fine, IMO. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com