"Philippe A. Bouchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lock mechanism was added to shifted_ptr<>:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/shifted_ptr.zip
>
> Benchmarks are also updated. Still shifted_ptr<> is using less memory and
> twice faster for reconstruction time.
Almost.
> Notes:
> - The first memory map report is not precise (shifted_ptr<U>).
> - The reports were reordered (shifted_ptr<U>, shifted_ptr<T> &
> shared_ptr<T>).
>
> I believe there is not that much left to do besides optimizations.
Have you tried a comparison against a shared_ptr using an optimized
count allocator? Nobody has invested as much effort in optimizing
shared_ptr as you are pouring into shifted_ptr, but an experiment I
did years ago made a huge difference in the efficiency of shared_ptr
just by implementing a crude allocator for count objects (took me
about 10 minutes to code up). For me to find shifted_ptr convincing
I'd have to see a noticeable performance improvement over using an
optimized count allocator with shared_ptr.
--
David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
