- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Link Copied
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Are you saying that your compiler generates an implicit move constructor and/or assignment operator even though, unless you define TBB_DEPRECATED_MUTEX_COPYING (only has an effect for the mutex types, not for the scoped_lock types), TBB provides explicit copy declarations (though not definitions, i.e., the pre-C++11 solution to get "= delete")? I think that would be a bug in your compiler...
I don't see any move features for std::lock_guard, and they should not be implicitly generated for the same reason, unless there's a bug in your C++11 library. There's no reason for TBB's scoped_lock classes to provide them, either.
I do see move features for std::unique_lock. You should be able to use that, but it seems that TBB's queuing mutexes are not BasicLockable like other mutex types are (see "C++11 Compatibility" in the Reference Manual: those TBB mutex types are even Lockable), although a reason is currently not provided nor does one immediately occur to me (I have not investigated further)?
Disclaimer: I don't have the official standard text for C++11.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page