"Hurd, Matthew" <hurdm@sig.com> wrote in message news:BA1220310B07EC4A8E321B451E07AF47766CCC@msgbal501.ds.susq.com...
On Behalf Of Michael Glassford * Rename to improve consistency and eliminate abbreviations: Use "read" and "write" instead of "shared" and "exclusive". Just a quick note from the bike shop. I've always had an issue with rw/read/write as this is a common use case rather than shared/exclusive which is the real deal.
Going along these lines I think rw_mutex is a bad name, though I grant it is commonly understood.
The oxymoron shareable_mutex or something other shorter name would make me happier.
I agree that shared/exclusive are more general terms than read/write. I stuck with read/write for now for several not very weighty reasons: 1) AFAIK, that's the common, accepted terminology for this type of mutex; 2) that's the terminology most of the library was already using; 3) some names didn't seem to convert conveniently to the shared/exclusive terminolgy; 4) using read/write seems to result in shorter names. I'm not stuck on a particular terminology, however; what I care about is that it's consistent (not read/write in some places and shared/exclusive in others, which is how it was before). In other words, I'm open to renaming suggestions. Here's a list of currently used names that any naming proposal would need to address: classes ------- read_write_mutex try_read_write_mutex timed_read_write_mutex scoped_read_write_lock scoped_try_read_write_lock scoped_timed_read_write_lock member functions ---------------- read_lock try_read_lock timed_read_lock write_lock try_write_lock timed_write_lock enumeration constants --------------------- sp_writer_priority sp_reader_priority sp_alternating_many_reads sp_alternating_single_read Mike