Edit Question - KnowledgeHub

Title Body

I am maintaining a library that contains a Mutex class. I cannot decide if the lock() and unlock() functions exposed by this class should be const or not. I looked for similar code on the Web, and could find both implementations. First implementation, lock() and unlock() are not const. It means someone who uses the Mutex class in a const function should put extra effort to call Mutex's functions: class Mutex { public: void lock(); void unlock(); }; class Foo { public: void getBar(Bar& bar) const { m_mutex.lock(); bar = m_bar; m_mutex.unlock(); } private: // Mutable, responsability of the user (or we could use a const_cast when needed) mutable Mutex m_mutex; Bar m_bar; }; Second implementation, lock() and unlock() are const, even if that does not sound very natural (as we modify the Mutex instance), but the user does not have to bother when calling those functions in one of his const functions: class Mutex { public: void lock() const; void unlock() const; }; class Foo { public: void getBar(Bar& bar) const { m_mutex.lock(); bar = m_bar; m_mutex.unlock(); } private: Mutex m_mutex; Bar m_bar; }; What solution do you prefer ? I hope your opinions will help me to take a decision.

Tags (comma-separated) Cancel