Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
[... Mutex * mutex() const ...]
And the Mutex thing (std0X::whatever) shall also provide something like
pthread_mutex_t * c_mutex(); pthread_mutex_t const * c_mutex() const;
That pthread_mutex_t shall be defined in <cthread> (and it shall of course also be available through *deprecated* <pthread.h>) and shall perform dynamic dispatching for "C-style" code (depending on "C++ mutex type"). Oder?
Forget that <cthread> for a while, how about sharing your thoughts on the proposed elimination of the try/timed axis. ;-)
I can't speak for the boost implementation (haven't carefully studied it), but the Metrowerks implementation also supports conditions operating on a recursive mutex.
Interesting. I presume that this was a deliberate design decision.
It has a precondition "lock.mutex()->locked() && lock.mutex()-> lock_count() == 1" (or something like that... brrrr, so many "lock" things... "guard" would sound much better ;-) )
Does it? I think that the Boost implementation tries to operate "correctly" for lock_count() > 1, but I may have misread the code.