Boost logo

Boost :

From: jpanzer_at_[hidden]
Date: 2000-08-09 16:48:20

Jens Maurer wrote:

> Dietmar Kuehl wrote:
> > <>
> I've read through the paper.
> For avoiding race conditions, it focuses very much on
> mutexes and locks. However, there seems to be a (growing)
> set of data structures available which do not require any
> locks. For example, a lock-free (yet fully thread-safe)
> single-linked list can be achieved when a few atomic CPU
> instructions are available (only).
> While this is probably system specific, I wonder whether
> such atomic operations can be presented in a portable
> interface so as to promote portable implementations of
> lock-free data structures.

Atomic increment and decrement could be really useful
for reference counting.
However, I worry that not all systems could implement such
atomic operations efficiently without some piece of
auxiliary storage. Is this an unfounded worry?


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at