From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-28 11:20:30
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>> http://www.boost.org/boost/detail/lwm_gcc.hpp is also broken.
>> Because of the sched_yield or something else?
> Yes (plus the issue of memory barriers).
>> Perhaps the lwm_gcc should just be removed?
>> (and lwm_linux)
> Yes, definitely.
These two are off by default. I'll probably remove them as soon as I switch
the Windows shared_ptr to the atomic version.
> Current impl aside for a moment, pthread_mutex_t does some
> dispatching because it represents multiple mutex types. A
> "lightweight mutex" doesn't need really that.
True, and it doesn't need CV support either. That said, a pthread_mutex is
close enough; the most important requirement for lightweight_mutex is
"header-only" (which is why boost::mutex can't be used.)
> Well, I guess that boost simply needs standard atomic<> template
For shared_ptr yes, but quick_allocator still needs an "ordinary"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk