Clarify that synchronized_value is not standardised yet

This commit is contained in:
Jonathan Wakely
2017-03-27 20:05:14 +01:00
parent 85543a94e9
commit 65aa60fe10

View File

@@ -12718,7 +12718,8 @@ Flag all unnamed `lock_guard`s and `unique_lock`s.
It should be obvious to a reader that the data is to be guarded and how. This decreases the chance of the wrong mutex being locked, or the mutex not being locked. It should be obvious to a reader that the data is to be guarded and how. This decreases the chance of the wrong mutex being locked, or the mutex not being locked.
Using a `synchronized_value<T>` (see the [WG21 proposal](http://wg21.link/p0290)) ensures that the data has a mutex, and the right mutex is locked when the data is accessed. Using a `synchronized_value<T>` ensures that the data has a mutex, and the right mutex is locked when the data is accessed.
See the [WG21 proposal](http://wg21.link/p0290)) to add `synchronized_value` to a future TS or revision of the C++ standard.
##### Example ##### Example