[interfacekit] Fwd: BAutolock

On 2003-09-11 at 07:24:38 [+0200], Waldemar Kornewald wrote:
> Hi,
> the BAutolock class is a little bit too simple, so I would like to ask if I
> may add some extensions to it. ;)
> Actually I need the Unlock() extension for my PPP implementation. Currently,
> I am using my own LockerHelper class to solve the problem, but it would be
> nice if I could replace it with BAutolock.
> 
> The following extensions would be needed:
> 
> The constructor will get an additional parameter:
> bool initialLockStatus = false
> With this parameter you can specify if the supplied BLocker/BLooper is
> already locked and thus does not need additional locking.
> All constructors will call Relock().
> 
> bool Relock()
> This locks the BLocker/BLooper object if it is not already locked by this
> object. This method is called by the constructor(s).
> 
> void Unlock()
> This allows to unlock the locker before the destructor is called (the
> BLocker's/BLooper's Unlock() function will only be called if the internal
> status says it is locked). This method is called by the destructor.
> 
> void SetLockStatus(bool lockStatus)
> This allows to set the internal lock status in order to prevent Unlock()'ing
> the BLocker/BLooper by Unlock() (or force an Unlock()).
> 
> 
> I think all functions can be made inline without increasing the header size
> too much.
> There should be no compatibility problems as this class consists of inline
> methods only.
> 
> Waldemar

Other related posts: