That would be great, unfortunately Boost doesn't provide an atomics implementation. The closest might be the proposed atomics implementation in C++0x and GCC 4.4, but we'd still need the pthreads implementation for some Solaris flavors...
Frankly, our atomics implementation is fine, it just needs good unit tests on all platforms. I don't think (at least for the near future) you will find a portable atomics library that is as concise as drizzled's unless we want to make TBB a dependency, and I wouldn't recommend that. -jay On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Brian Aker <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > I wrote about this in the bug report by Stewart on our use of them. The best > thing we can do I believe is just switch to using the ones provided by Boost. > That way we have far more people looking at that particular piece of code. > > Cheers, > -Brian > > On May 27, 2010, at 8:42 AM, Joe Daly wrote: > >> ++ this would be a great idea, there are also lots of defines in this code >> depending on architecture that Im not sure if we use all of them, it would >> be good to verify > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
