Hi Gavin,


Il giorno ven 22 mar 2019 alle ore 23:26 Gavin Lambert via Boost-users <boost-users@lists.boost.org> ha scritto:

Which brings up another point; your current
implementation is not thread-safe.  Which is
fine, but you should probably mention that
explicitly in your readme.

Actually that's mentioned already: https://github.com/f18m/boost-intrusive-pool#about-thread-safety

 
>My first implementation of the memory pool
>indeed was using C++11 perfect forwarding to
>call the ctor/dtor of type T when the item was
>pulled out the pool or was returning to it.
>I later removed such feature because I realized
>that calling the ctor of the items to recycle
>produced issues with classes having multiple inheritance IIRC.
>I don't think it's safe and sane to call the
>ctor of the same instance multiple times...Â

Calls must be paired -- you allocate aligned
uninitialised storage (aligned_storage), then
placement-new to call the constructor on that
storage, then eventually call the destructor, and
then later you can placement-new again.

You must never call the constructor twice in a
row or the destructor twice in a row (unless it's
trivial), but alternating is fine.
Again, this is how things like optional and
variant work internally -- and since they do that
part for you, it can be useful to re-use it
rather than re-implementing it.

Interesting.
I remember I had some issues I could not figure out, but thanks for the advice. I may retry this approach (perfect forwarding to the ctor) in the future!

Thanks,
Francesco