[boost] Re: Lock unification [move]

David Abrahams wrote:

Howard Hinnant <hinnant@twcny.rr.com> writes:

...

So in your example l2 would be unlocked, l1 would remain locked, and the underlying mutex lock count would be decremented by 1.

weird; the mutex association is not transferred along with "locked-ness"?

It throws if the two locks don't refer to the same mutex.

Uh-oh: I think I just invoked the locked-ness monster.

<groan> ;-) -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com