Subj : Re: Lockable objects
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : Uenal Mutlu
Date : Thu May 19 2005 10:27 pm

"Torsten Robitzki" wrote
> Uenal Mutlu wrote:
>
> > The advantage of having such an "architecture" in the language
> > gives far more possibilities for the users.
>
> And now a new buzzword: "architecture". Calling having a mutex in every
> container an "architecture" is just ...

If many of the standard objects have these properties we indeed can
speak of an architecture having this property.

> What can a user do with a container that have a buildin mutex that the
> user can not do with a container plus a mutex? What is the difference of:
> mutex m; std::vector<int> v;
>
> to your approach and to something like std::pair<mutex, std::vector<int> > ?

Many things could be automated, and more advanced things could be realized.
Such argumentation like yours were also happening before templates in C++.
Today they are very important.  Tomorrow threading and locking of objects will be.

> > And: multithreading has become a de facto standard in programming,
> > esp. in application programming.
>
> Really? Did your teacher told you that? Why especial for application
> programming?

Because the old school programmers have yet to (ie. won't) understand their power.
It's only a matter of time.

.