Boost logo

Boost :

From: Talbot, George (Gtalbot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-17 15:43:14

As a developer of an application using these techniques, shared_ptr<>
has a lot of advantages. Can a class which has the same public
interface as shared_ptr<> be written using your methods? Could
boost::shared_ptr<> itself be rewritten to use your methods resulting in
an atomic shared_ptr<>?

George T. Talbot
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> On Behalf Of Chris Thomasson
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 7:18 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] I think using spinlocks to simulate an
> atomicshared_ptr isdeadlock-prone, or inefficient.
> > I read the stuff from Chris Thommason and I have to admit that I'm
> > too sure how I'd wrap shared_ptr with it to make this work.
> Here is an alternative to shared_ptr:
> This is my version of an atomically thread-safe reference counting
> covers both basic and strong thread-safety models. Parts of it can
also be
> used in a signal handler, because it has 100% lock-free weak
> increments/decrements' and pointer swap operations. It amortizes lock
> actions from the first strong reference to an object X, down to the
> drop-to-zero condition of object X. What do you think?
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

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