Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [atomic] interprocess (was Re: [lockfree] include into 1.51?)
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-07-10 02:29:39

>>>> great to hear ... checking the specific commit, it seems that the
>>>> integration into the boost infrastructure (doc/testfarm etc) is still
>>>> missing ... please compare with r79196, the specific commit for
>>>> boost.lockfree.
>>> thanks for the pointer, will fix it, and if you notice anything else, just
>>> write so I can fix it ASAP
>> i wonder, what is the current state of boost.atomic regarding
>> interprocess communication?
> if BOOST_ATOMIC_*_LOCK_FREE==2, then the corresponding data type is
> interprocess-safe

i see ... do you have any plans to provide a metafunction or traits
class, which provides this information at the level of the c++ language
so that it can be used for template metaprogramming?

> (this behaviour is only recommended for std::atomic,
> but not guaranteed)

i know :(
imo, this is not very helpful, though and boost should follow the
recommendation of the standard ... but since compilers start to
implement atomic<> these days, do you know the behavior of these
implementations regarding shared memory?

> as per the suggestion during review I have implemented a partially
> specialized template representing the *_LOCK_FREE macros to allow
> implementing an "interprocess_atomic" that is safe independent from the
> data type (as long as atomic_flag is safe, of course)

according to the latest draft that i have on my machine, atomic_flag
shall be atomic.

cheers, tim

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