Subject: Re: [boost] [atomic] comments
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-01 14:12:35
(responding to an old mail after re-reading my latest version of the draft)
> > > well if the atomics are truely atomic, then BOOST_ATOMIC_*_LOCK_FREE
> > > == 2 and I find a platform where you cannot use them safely between
> > > processes difficult to imagine (not that something like that could
> > > not exist)>
> > one would have to do the dispatching logic in the preprocessor, so one
> > cannot dispatch depending on the typedef operator.
> it's certainly possible to build a helper template to map types to these
> macro values (map to the value of BOOST_ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE for all types
> T with sizeof(T) == sizeof(int) for example)
the preprocessor variables are only defined for integral types.
the standard also says:
template <class T>
bool atomic_is_lock_free(const volatile atomic_type*);
The function atomic_is_lock_free (29.6) indicates whether the object is lock-
free. In any given program execution, the result of the lock-free query shall
be consistent for all pointers of the same type.
but atomic_is_lock_free is only defined for integral atomic types.
so to be standard compliant, one could build the helper template only for
integral atomic types.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk