From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-20 11:34:21
> Well that's Microsoft's problem, is it not. They'll do whatever needs to
> done to make Interlocked* work on win64 (or win32/IA64, or win64 in win32
> compatibility mode, or whatever.) And if they don't, boost::atomic_t will
> simply fall back to the mutex solution.
> I don't see a reason to not use Interlocked* on win32.
something like boost::*refcounter_t* (with e.g. addref/unref
methods and well defined memory synch. semantics for proper
destruction of referenced object(s)) using Interlocked* on
windows/IA32, maybe something else on windows/IA64 and mutex
on pthreads would be OK, IMHO. boost::*atomic_t* is just too
low level/error-prone/MP-unsafe with respect to memory synch
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk