From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-02 11:25:32
Jeff Garland <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Howard Hinnant wrote:
>> On Nov 2, 2006, at 10:09 AM, Anthony Williams wrote:
>>
>>> Your sample adaptor has given me the idea of not having an explicit
>>> timed_lock
>>> function, but rather overloads of try_lock:
>>>
>>> bool try_lock(); // just try once
>>> bool try_lock(unsigned spin_count); // spin this many times
>>> bool try_lock(target_time_type target_time); // wait until the
>>> specified time
>>> bool try_lock(time_period_type wait_time); // wait for the
>>> specified period
>>
>> I like it.
>>
>
> Can I respectfully suggest time_duration_type instead of time_period_type?
Of course; the names were just placeholders.
> That would bring the terminology in line with N1900/N2058. I'm assuming what
> you actually want to do is have user code that looks like this:
>
> if (try_lock(seconds(3))) {...
>
> if (try_lock(milliseconds(100))) { ...
Yes.
> In boost date_time and N1900/N2058 time_period is an interval type with a
> start time and an end time. Oh, and if N1900 isn't persuasive enough,
> 'duration' happens to be the term ISO 8601 uses define a length of time.
Thanks for the references. Duration is what I meant.
Anthony
-- Anthony Williams Software Developer Just Software Solutions Ltd http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk