Subj : Re: Lock Free Programming with Boost::shared_ptr instead of Hazard  Pointers
To   : comp.lang.c++.moderated,comp.programming.threads
From : Ronald Landheer-Cieslak
Date : Tue Mar 22 2005 06:23 pm

Joe Seigh wrote:
> Roshan Naik wrote:
>>2) Shared_ptr is not thread safe ?? I dont know. But it is possible that
>>    it is currently not implemented to perform its operations in an
>>atomic/thread-safe fashion. But perhaps that can be fixed (with help
>>from the future standard..volatile/CAS). But ofcourse, hazard pointers
>>technique also relies on the similar requirements from the standard.
> I believe there's a parameter to make it mostly threadsafe.  The non
> thread-safe part is you have to know the refcount of any shared_ptr's
> you copy won't go to zero during the copy operation.  Basically, you
> have to "own" the shared_ptr you're copying.
Which basically conforms to the "an object can't protect against it's
own destruction" mantra. Doesn't that also hold true for the atomic_ptr?
(Haven't checked yet, so really don't know).

rlc

      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]

.