From: Andy Glew (glew_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-08-29 17:11:58
> to explain why some requirements are still floating around in
> the discussion, since I sort of started it off by asking for such a thing.
Actually, Reid, you're not the only one looking for good cache classes.
My requirements are probably for even higher performance, more volatile,
messier, and more dynamically tunable classes than yours are: my application
is simulating CPU architectures, i.e. simulating real CPU hardware caches.
Not just the caches caches that y'all are using today, but also the caches
that I would like to put into the next chip I design. Varying the priority and
management policies is one of the typical things I do.
Since I cannot afford the overhead of virtual functions in many places
(measured: 20% slowdown) I explicitly design data structures for use
in inheritance hierarchies, statically overriding methods.
Hence my interest in designing primitives that can be combined by the
implementor of a caching class, rather than attempting to provide a cache class
that is everything to all users.
The reference Valentin gave us frankly does not look very promising to
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk