On January 12, 2013 9:57:22 PM "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Andrey, the provided patch goes too far for what I was expecting. You have made a lot of changes, C++11 interface has not been preserved, and I'm not sure the algorithm is the same.
The algorithm is different for sure. What exactly do you mean by C++11 interface? Does C++11 have call_once? The only C++11 thing I saw was the once_flag definition which gave no apparent benefits.
What I was asking for is just a patch to ensure that
typedef unsigned long uintmax_atomic_t;
is atomic in all platforms.
Boost.Atomic only provides atomic<> template, it does not define the functional interface for atomic ops. The typedef you mentioned can only be the following with Boost.Atomic:
typedef atomic< unsigned long > uintmax_atomic_t;
The integer type can be different from unsigned long, depending on the platform-specific support macros, but you get the idea. This is *not* what I proposed because, obviously, this would require including Boost.Atomic into user's code and consequently linking with it. This is what I was looking for as it is intended by the typedef name,
Le 12/01/13 19:50, Andrey Semashev a écrit : that is the larger unsigned integer type that can be atomic for a specific platform.
As a side note, the standard doesn't specify the underlying storage types for the atomic<> wrapper. Whenever you try to use atomic ops on actual integer types you are relying on platform-specific details, which Boost.Atomic is designed to conceal.
For the comments about the Jamfile, I deduce that the patch need to link with Boost.Atomic. I expected a patch that didn't need to link to Boost.Atomic. I should have missed something.
That's right. Again, my proposal was to use Boost.Atomic in Boost.Thread internally and not expose it to users. That way Boost.Thread links with Boost.Atomic, but users do not.
I don't see how Boost.Thread can use Boost.Atomic internally. What do you mean? linking statically? Shouldn't this generate a double definition on the executable if the application needs Boost.Atomic? Vicente