Re: [boost] Re: shifted_ptr<> w/ lock mechanism

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-30 11:09:03

From: "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]>
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> > I've taken the liberty to convert the patch into
detail/quick_allocator.hpp.
> > #define BOOST_SP_USE_QUICK_ALLOCATOR to make shared_ptr use it.
> > shared_ptr_alloc_test.cpp has been updated, too. You can now compare
> > quick_allocator vs SGI std::allocator yourself. :-)
>
> I'm not all set up to run those tests and measure the times, which is
> why I was hoping Philippe would check it out.

There is a test in libs/smart_ptr/test called shared_ptr_alloc_test.cpp that
you can use.

> > quick_allocator doesn't compile on VC6 or Borland 5.5.1, though. I
haven't
> > investigated too deeply.
>
> You must have changed the code I sent then. Works fine with VC6 for
> me; borland has the usual problems with ICEs and scope qualification.

I did.

> This was just a quick hack; I'm surprised you thought it was worthwhile
> modifying your sources to accomodate it despite the lack of *any* test
> data...

The modification to shared_count.hpp is small and macro-guarded, so it won't
affect existing code. Seeing how well a "quick hack" performs can be
valuable information, given how often the "optimized count allocator"
question comes up.

> or did you try it?

This is almost an insult.