https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/193 <pre class="wiki">The answer to the question "http://boost.org/libs/thread/doc/faq.html#question4" seems to be a good candidate for a new concept check or "allocator". Always lock mutexes in the same order. </pre> en-us /htdocs/site/boost.png https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/193 Trac 1.4.3 Steven Watanabe Sat, 24 Jan 2009 00:47:44 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/193#comment:1 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/193#comment:1 <ul> <li><strong>severity</strong> → <span class="trac-field-new">Showstopper</span> </li> </ul> <p> The link to the faq doesn't work any more. Here's the new link <a href="http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_31_0/libs/thread/doc/faq.html#question4">http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_31_0/libs/thread/doc/faq.html#question4</a> </p> <p> Also, I fail to see what locking mutexes in order has to do with concept checks and "allocators" (see <a class="closed ticket" href="https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/100" title="#100: Feature Requests: more use of the concept &#34;allocator&#34; (closed: wontfix)">#100</a> for the idea of an "allocator" used here). How can you check runtime constraints across functions at compile time? How does a mechanism for acquiring and releasing resources help to control the order in which resources are acquired? </p> <p> Can we just close this ticket? </p> Ticket Steven Watanabe Sun, 17 May 2009 00:42:53 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/193#comment:2 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/193#comment:2 <ul> <li><strong>status</strong> <span class="trac-field-old">assigned</span> → <span class="trac-field-new">closed</span> </li> <li><strong>resolution</strong> <span class="trac-field-old">None</span> → <span class="trac-field-new">invalid</span> </li> </ul> <p> Since this ticket doesn't really make any sense, I'm closing it. If anyone is still interested in it and has a more specific idea of what it means, feel free to reopen. </p> Ticket