C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: Slim mutexes and locks based on C++20 std::atomic::wait

From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 17:29:08 +0300
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 17:26, Marko Mäkelä via Std-Proposals
<std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >Sure, but the reason to standardize this type is that it's designed to
> >be portably very small,
> >whereas std::mutex isn't.
> I realize that my analogy to the dimensions of physical objects was a
> little flawed, because it implied that we would aim to standardize a
> type with an exact size. Indeed, it would only be of a "small" size.

And at that, standardize a type designed to be small because the type
isn't susceptible
to the size being required to be large by compatibility with
already-existing mutexes of the target

Received on 2021-08-30 09:29:23