Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [boost] Cache flushing in the constructors
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-08-05 00:18:20

Next message: Justinas V. Daugmaudis: "[boost] Quasi-random number generators"
Previous message: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] Checking library binary compatibility with respect to compile time options"
In reply to: Sid Sacek: "Re: [boost] Cache flushing in the constructors"
Next in thread: Holger Grund: "Re: [boost] Cache flushing in the constructors"

On Aug 4, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Sid Sacek <ssacek_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I'm starting to believe the answer to my question is that it is not the responsibility of constructors to solve potential cache-coherency issues, but rather, the code that uses the boost classes must be knowledgeable of the hardware's limitations and make special provisions for it.

The idea of the new c++0x memory model is that you only need to know about /it's/ limitations. But yeah, trying to do thread safety at the object level is almost always wrong. The necessary locks depend on context.

--
Dave Abrahams (mobile)
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com

Next message: Justinas V. Daugmaudis: "[boost] Quasi-random number generators"
Previous message: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] Checking library binary compatibility with respect to compile time options"
In reply to: Sid Sacek: "Re: [boost] Cache flushing in the constructors"
Next in thread: Holger Grund: "Re: [boost] Cache flushing in the constructors"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk