Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-26 11:30:04
Andrew Chinkoff wrote:
> Below is the typical realization of A::Instance():
> static A& Instance()
> if (instance_ == NULL)
> boost::mutex::scoped_lock locker(mtx_); // this
> is the thread safe cost!
> instance_ = new A();
> return *instance_;
> You should note that:
> 1) Cost for thread safe synchronization is paid only once.
> After instance had created this cost is no longer paid.
That code has a race condition, so it appears more efficient than it should.
> 2) Cost for function call (A::Instance()) is replaced with
> smart_ptr::get() one.
> Did I miss the point?
Yes. The smart pointer's operators are inlined functions that merely access a pointer data member. Zero overhead. Your function cannot be inlined and, depending upon how you manage the synchronization, it can be fairly costly, but most certainly includes function call overhead.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk