From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-18 14:24:45
Peter Dimov <pdimov <at> pdimov.com> writes:
>
> What is the reason to prefer the current instance/lease formulation instead
> of
>
> typedef ... instance_type;
> instance_type instance(); // automatically serves as a lease
>
> ?
Exactly. No reason what so ever IMO. Author argues that his design allows
automatic locking of class method invocation. But IMO this iswrong in a first
place and if necessary can be achived with layered design.
> (Also, why mutexed_singleton? Mutexed is not a word; synchronized_singleton
> maybe?)
singleton<syncronized<T> >
Gennadiy