Subj : Re: STL Containers w/ Virtually Zero-Overhead Lock-Free Reads...
To   : (Usenet)
From : Chris Thomasson
Date : Sat Sep 24 2005 10:34 pm

> I wonder how a sequence like
>
> your::vector<int> v(/* filled some how */);
>
> if ( !v.empty() )
> {
>   v.first();
> }
>
> could be implemented without a lock, and without a lock external to the
> container.

An external lock would be completely fine and compatible with my algorithm;
the method I am using provides the ability for STL-Containters to achieve
lock-free read-only iteration. This means that any "critical-sequences" of
operations that need to executed atomically are allowed to use various forms
of use mutual exclusion, including mutexs...




> Lock-Free or Not Lock Free, I think that STL-Containers have a interface
> that is quit useless for beeing used in a threaded eviroment.

Yeah. Your example demonstrates this. Luckily, STL-Containers are not
useless for high-performance lock-free read-only iterations...



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

.