> -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 5:49 AM > To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use __rw_atomic_xxx() on Windows > > Travis Vitek wrote: > > Oh, yeah. that is the other thing that I did Friday. I wrote a > > testcase to compare __rw_atomic_add32() against > InterlockedIncrement() on Win32. > > There is a performance penalty... > > I'd be curious to know if the performance penalty is due to > the function call overhead or something else. > > In any case though, I think we could tweak the patch and > change the __rw_atomic_pre{de,in}crement() overloads for int > and long to call the appropriate Interlocked{De,In}crement() > intrinsics and have the other overloads use the new ones. > > Farid, what do you think about this approach?
I agree. And I decided to make the changes above without making the tests to see the performance penalty. Farid.
