From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-19 14:55:19
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 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.
I'm not sure if there are any advantages, but try_lock and timed_lock
could actually be derived classes of scoped_lock in that case, using
an intentionally slicing move.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com