I'd be more tempted to specialize `std::lock_guard` for the class. E.g. so
that
std::lock_guard lock{aPoint};
works an RAII lock on `aPoint`. I think that makes it easier because
there's only one thing the user has to remember, "lock_guard".
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 9:19 AM Walt Karas <wka...@verizonmedia.com.invalid>
wrote:
> scoped_lock is I think an alternative to lock_guard to avoid deadlock when
> multiple mutexes must be locked at the same time.
>
> The point of the utility I propose is a fail-safe to make sure that
> mutex-protected data is not accessed without locking the mutex, and clarity
> about what data the mutex is protecting.
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:34 PM Jason Kenny <jke...@verizonmedia.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I was thinking of https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/thread/scoped_lock
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 4:53 PM Walt Karas <wka...@verizonmedia.com
> .invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> What's the name of it in the Standard Lib?
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 4:45 PM Jason Kenny <jke...@verizonmedia.com
> >> .invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I am unclear why it is needed. C++ 17 already has this in the std
> >> library.
> >> > these should be used instead of making our own
> >> >
> >> > Jason
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 4:17 PM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Don’t we have scoped mutexes already ?
> >> > >
> >> > > — Leif
> >> > >
> >> > > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 12:08, Walt Karas <wka...@verizonmedia.com
> >> > .invalid>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > https://godbolt.org/z/6klEJn
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Useful for mutex-protected objects, where the mutex is only locked
> >> > within
> >> > > > code blocks. Could be used in this PR:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/5187
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
