Sid Sacek wrote:
From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gottlob Frege
I don't think lock/unlock on each -> call is typically a good idea. x = p->x; y = p->y; That's 2 lock unlock sequences instead of one. Inefficient and what if y changes after you read x? It hides the locking too much, potentially leading to abuse and mistakes.
I agree and disagree. I would at some point want to create a class similar to what's being described, but would not expose it to the rest of the world to use ( and abuse ). A class like that could come in handy, as long as it's used with the knowledge of its strengths and limitations.
Tony's on target. You've said you wanted the class to be a shared_ptr, which means it can be used in myriad ways without even knowing the cost. If it were a distinct type, then it couldn't be unknowingly misused. Such a type, were you to create it, should not be a special version of shared_ptr. That also avoids forking relative to C++0x. _____ Rob Stewart robert.stewart@sig.com Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer; Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.