Subject: Re: [boost] Interest in double-ended priority queue? (priority_deque)
From: Nathaniel McClatchey (njmcclatchey1990_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-01 21:37:18
I haven't found much information on testing for compatibility with
interprocess, but With proper use of mutexes (sharable for const
functions, exclusive for non-const) it should work with interprocess
For those of you who are interested in the project:
Should a comparison object be mutable or should it be copied when
needed by a const function?
Should the random-access functions remain? They do not affect
performance but if used improperly could lead to code dependent on the
workings of the priority_deque.
Should functions independent of value_type be member functions or
global functions in a special namespace?
Also, because I forgot to do this earlier, here's a link to the source
code for you to examine, criticize, use, and edit:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Joel <jdy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Nathaniel McClatchey <njmcclatchey1990 <at> pointloma.edu> writes:
> Sounds interesting to me. Good contribution to boost::container. Is it ready
> to work with interprocess?
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk