Peter Dimov wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
Testing, mostly... and fixing any obvious errors. It's hard to write code without a compiler. :-)
Definitely :-) ... Is there any particular test I should run? Or is it basically all the smart_ptr test?
All smart_ptr tests, yes. There are some that aren't run by default, shared_ptr_timing_test, shared_ptr_mt_test and weak_ptr_mt_test. It would be interesting to compare the performance of _timing_test with or without -D BOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS.
OK.. done.. Made one minor fix to the implementations for an extra argument to decrement count (checked into CVS). The results for the timing test are: With BOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS.. * cw-8.3 debug, 18.06 * gcc-3.3 debug, 50.98 * gcc-3.3 release, 18.47 Without BOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS.. * cw-8.3 debug, 21.08 * gcc-3.3 debug, 51.07 * gcc-3.3 release, 18.52 I didn't build the release of cw-8.3 because it was taking along time, more than 10 minutes, to compile some of the files. It's most likely one of the unbounded optimizations CW likes getting into. To me the curious aspect is that CW is faster in debug mode than GCC in release mode. It's nice to see the threaded code be almost as fast as the non-threaded code. Oh, I guess I only implied that all tests did pass. And I didn't mention that my machine is only a G3-233. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - Grafik/jabber.org