Subj : Re: A question about atomic_ptr
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : Alexander Terekhov
Date : Tue Apr 12 2005 11:45 am


Chris Thomasson wrote:
> 
> > This is about local_shared_ptr, not about copy/replace. The
> > local_shared_ptrs in an ownership group (which needs to be local to a
> > specific thread) use a local unsynchronized reference count to keep track
> > of their single shared_ptr-like reference into the shared_ptr group. ChrisX
> > got it right, but I still think that there's no need to acquire in the
> > increment, it's an ordinary 'add_ref_strong'.
> 
> If add_ref_strong already provides the necessary memory barriers 

What for? add_ref_strong() is naked atomic.

regards,
alexander.

.