From: Howard Hinnant [mailto:hinnant@twcny.rr.com]
I mostly agree with Bronek Kozicki. Given a movable lock, Eric Niebler's proposal:
scoped_lock try_lock( Mutex & m ); scoped_lock timed_lock( Mutex & m );
is a better try/timed interface. Heisenberg constructors must die.
Sorry, I don't know what a Heisenberg constructor is.
It's a reference to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Constructors that sometimes act one way and sometimes another must die. ;)
From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave@boost-consulting.com] Howard Hinnant <hinnant@twcny.rr.com> writes:
scoped_lock lk1(m, defer_lock); // not locked ^^^^ ^^^^ Redundant. "deferred" is better.
If you named it not_locked you wouldn't need the comment. ;) Of these three choices: 1. try, deferred 2. try_lock, deferred 3. try_lock, defer_lock I tend to like #3 the best. Glen
Glen Knowles wrote:
From: Howard Hinnant [mailto:hinnant@twcny.rr.com]
I mostly agree with Bronek Kozicki. Given a movable lock, Eric Niebler's proposal:
scoped_lock try_lock( Mutex & m ); scoped_lock timed_lock( Mutex & m );
is a better try/timed interface. Heisenberg constructors must die.
Sorry, I don't know what a Heisenberg constructor is.
It's a reference to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
It's an indication that I can't tell Shroedinger's cat from Heisenberg's principle. ;-)
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Peter Dimov Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 5:48 AM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Lock unification [move]
Glen Knowles wrote:
From: Howard Hinnant [mailto:hinnant@twcny.rr.com]
I mostly agree with Bronek Kozicki. Given a movable lock, Eric Niebler's proposal:
scoped_lock try_lock( Mutex & m ); scoped_lock timed_lock( Mutex & m );
is a better try/timed interface. Heisenberg constructors must die.
Sorry, I don't know what a Heisenberg constructor is.
It's a reference to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
It's an indication that I can't tell Shroedinger's cat from Heisenberg's principle. ;-)
Just back a truck over it; that should flatten its wave function nicely. Hmmmn. Maybe that's where Heinlein's "flat cats" aka "tribbles" found their genesis; after all, remember the title of his penultimate novel. My own personal theory, though, is that they generated spontaneously within the Heisenberg energy/time limits, and at some point, they'll all find nice Feynmann paths back to Quantum Samsara (think I just came up with a new rock band...hey, don't laugh; remember Toad the Wet Sprocket?). Okay, okay, okay...listen: can God create a race condition so complete, even He can't move the lock? Woaaah, like, heavy, lil' dude! Reid "I don't think that requires a smiley" Sweatman --returning to my hot tub in my *real* universe... -------------------------- The foregoing has not been paid for by the "Mind is a Terrible Thing Society of Lower Wapping," as they couldn't give a rusty quark for Mr. Mark about it, and would just like everyone to know that. Thank you.
participants (3)
-
Glen Knowles -
Peter Dimov -
Reid Sweatman