Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Review Request: boost.lockfree
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-24 08:55:40

Tim Blechmann wrote:

> since my first review request for boost.lockfree [1] was completely
> ignored, here a second version for review. the main differences are bug
> fixes provided by various people, trying to run boost.lockfree on
> different compilers/platforms.
> the original review request was:
> i would like to submit a small library of lock-free data structures for
> review.

Hopefully it will be added to the review queue; you can try to contact
the current review wizard otherwise.

> boost.lockfree provides:
> * boost::lockfree::fifo, a lock-free fifo queue
> * boost::lockfree::stack, a lock-free stack

I assume your data structures allow multiple concurrent writers.
Have you considered benchmarking them against implementations that don't
allow concurrent writes, since those are usually simpler?
If they're not as fast, it might be interesting to provide both. In any
case, I think benchmarks would be required to properly review that
library since it is in such a performance sensitive domain.

I also see your library provides an "atomic_int" type, which is a subset
of what the standard library provides in C++0x.
I believe there already are projects for implementing the standard
atomic int types within Boost, anyone has some info on this?

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