From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-15 11:00:09
Christopher Currie wrote:
> The differences between
>
> {
> scoped_lock l( m );
> }
>
> and
>
> {
> scoped_timed_lock l( m, t );
> }
>
> are much more descriptive me than
>
> {
> scoped_lock( m );
> }
>
> {
> scoped_lock( m, t );
> }
The "unified" timed lock case is
{
scoped_lock l( m, false );
if( l.timed_lock( t ) )
{
// do stuff
}
else
{
// what do we do here? presumably either:
// setup for unbounded wait
l.lock();
// do stuff
// or signal failure
}
}
The scoped_timed_lock use case also needs to eventually contain an if( l )
statement; you can't do much if you don't know whether your timed lock
succeeded. One might also argue that a separate scoped_timed_lock makes
accidentally omitting the if() statement more likely and harder to spot.
But it's hard to tell without real use cases.