2 ms·
My point is, "making sure x happens" or "follow this sure to work design philosophy which will break once the system is more complex than a game of billards" is
by nurettin 8y ago
My point is, "making sure x happens" or "follow this sure to work design philosophy which will break once the system is more complex than a game of billards" is not a guarantee to anything, therefore none of the smart pointers solve any problems about deadlocks caused by resource sharing.
- blackflame7000 8y agoI can tell you're not familiar with the latest C++ developments. RAII solves deadlocks so do things like std::lock_guard. C++ 11 is as safe as you're ever going to get while still maintaining fine granularity over the control of the system. C++ applications are some of the most vastly complicated programs in existence so I don't follow the argument that they break on projects larger than a breadbox.
- nurettin 8y agoI am familiar with all developments in C++ since 2001, that is why I am pretty sure that moving mutex primitives from platform level to language and memory model level has not changed anything in terms of deadlocks and you are just googling new stuff as we go.
- blackflame7000 8y agoYou should really check out the new stuff. It's a barely even the same language anymore. They've made many improvements.