On 6/1/23 20:36, Jason McKesson via Std-Proposals wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 8:05 PM Phil Bouchard <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/1/23 12:26, Jason McKesson via Std-Proposals wrote:
>>
>>> If you want "more positive feedback", you should strive not to come to
>>> a fact-fight unarmed.
>>
>> A generic solution is right here and it solves exactly the problem I was
>> raising:
>> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2023/p0290r4.html
>>
>> That basically proves again your negative evaluation of everything was
>> in vain. Honestly there's a thin line between trolling and your comments
>> to my regards for some reason.
>
> "Someone suggested a thing that is vaguely similar to what I
> suggested" is not the same thing as suggesting that thing. Note that
> the proposal in question explicitly does not put the mutex *inside* of
> the object. Nor does it have the specific issues we've been discussing
> here.
>
> There is a difference between not wanting to embed a mutex inside of
> an object (which, again, is what you suggested) and not wanting to
> have some way to tie objects to mutexes.

I'm beating a dead horse here.

-- 
Logo <https://www.fornux.com/>  
*Phil Bouchard*  facebook icon
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/phil-bouchard-5723a910/> 
Founder & CEO
T: (819) 328-4743
E: phil_at_[hidden]| www.fornux.com <http://www.fornux.com>
8 rue de la Baie| Gatineau (Qc), J8T 3H3 Canada
Banner <https://goglobalawards.org/> Le message ci-dessus, ainsi que les
documents l'accompagnant, sont destinés uniquement aux personnes
identifiées et peuvent contenir des informations privilégiées,
confidentielles ou ne pouvant être divulguées. Si vous avez reçu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le détruire.
This communication (and/or the attachments) is intended for named
recipients only and may contain privileged or confidential information
which is not to be disclosed. If you received this communication by
mistake please destroy all copies.