RE: [boost] Re: Re: problem with shared_ptr

From: Hurd, Matthew (hurdm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-17 17:28:13

> On Behalf Of Hurd, Matthew
> Sent: Tuesday, 18 November 2003 9:14 AM
> To: Boost mailing list
> Subject: RE: [boost] Re: Re: problem with shared_ptr
> 
> 
> 
> > On Behalf Of Philippe A. Bouchard
> >
> > Peter Dimov wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >> Try
> > >>
> > >>     http://www.pdimov.com/cpp/shared_count_x86_exp2.hpp
> >
> > Microsoft's compiler seems to support more than 1 processor... even
> more
> > efficiently:
> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-
> > us/dllproc/bas
> > e/interlockedincrementacquire.asp
> >
> [snip]
> 
[snip]
 
> For win32 the fastest approach I've found is to turn on the using
> intrinsics optimization for win32... though your mileage may vary.
Also
> be warned I've found a roughly 3 to 1 difference between AMD and Intel
> P4s on this because of the processor differences.
> 
> This snippet redefines your InterlockedIncrement to use the intrinsic
> implementation with no real overhead when optimized.
> 

which is the approach used in the link... FWIW

http://www.pdimov.com/cpp/shared_count_x86_exp2.hpp

Regards,

Matt.

IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments.  Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited.  Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument.  Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.