Re: [boost] [thread] RFC standard proposed mutex, read-write mutex, condition

Howard Hinnant wrote:

And all of the sudden the above code is no longer legal. If the code is legal with one constructor, what is it that makes the code a logic error **100% of the time**, instead of a fixable exceptional circumstance when using the second constructor?

By using the constructor that takes a mutex argument, I have specifically and intentionally said that it is a logic error for this condition to be used with another mutex. That's the whole and only purpose of the constructor, to express this intent of mine.