29 Nov
2008
29 Nov
'08
11:24 p.m.
Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
Jan Stetka wrote:
Hi,
Is there any reason why named_mutex and managed_shared_memory don't have a default constructor?
Because in the review the two step construction (default ctor + open()) was considered harmful. I guess now it would be useful in the presence of move semantics. Is that your intended use case?
Regards,
Ion _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
I'm don't known what "move semantics" are, my motive is so I can have named_mutex and managed_shared_memory in the global scope without having to instantiate as pointers.