
----- Original Message ----- From: "vicente.botet" <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 1:03 AM Subject: [boost] [thread] Exception based timed locks
Hi,
I've read recently about timed locks throwing an exception when there is a timeout. What do you think about this behaviour? Could the thread library provide both?
Next follows a piece of code without exceptions
while (polling) { t=now()+100; boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> l1(m1, t); if (l1.has_lock() { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> l2(m2, t); if (l2.has_lock() { boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> l3(m3, t); if (l2.has_lock() { foo(); polling = false; } else execute_on_failed(); } else execute_on_failed(); } else execute_on_failed(); }
and now with exceptions
while (polling) try { t=now()+100; boost::exception_unique_lock<boost::mutex> l1(m1, t); boost::exception_unique_lock<boost::mutex> l2(m2, t); boost::exception_unique_lock<boost::mutex> l3(m3, t); foo(); polling = false; } catch (timeout_exception& ex) {execute_on_failed(); }
What do you think about a try_lock_until, try_lock_for functions
while (polling) try { boost::try_lock_for(100, m1, m2, m3); foo(); polling = false; } catch (timeout_exception& ex) {execute_on_failed(); }
Sorry, in order to be exception safe we need a kind of scoped lock for tuples while (polling) try { exception_unique_lock_tuple<mutex, shared_mutex, mutex>(100, m1, m2, m3); foo(); polling = false; } catch (timeout_exception& ex) {execute_on_failed(); } Independent of the exception timeout, what do you think of a unique_lock_tuple? Regards, Vicente