From 65aa60fe1036f5e10f452aae70ec000c35ecf399 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jonathan Wakely Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:05:14 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify that synchronized_value is not standardised yet --- CppCoreGuidelines.md | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/CppCoreGuidelines.md b/CppCoreGuidelines.md index 8c38c63..4d300ce 100644 --- a/CppCoreGuidelines.md +++ b/CppCoreGuidelines.md @@ -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. -Using a `synchronized_value` (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` 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