"Attilio Rao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I'm having second thoughts about this one. There is a significant > > risk of false positives if the mutex is currently locked by another > > thread. I'm wondering whether to a) change the implementation so it > > only returns true if the mutex is owned by the current thread, or b) > > change the interface so you can specify a specific thread, or NULL > > for "any". > Please don't do the latter. Semantically the right thing to do here > is to assert if the curthread owns the lock or not. Any lock should > not be interested on what is the state in regard of other locks.
Thank you. That was my thought as well, but I didn't want to exclude the alternative without discussion. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
