On 11/11/2013 9:09 PM, Peter Relson wrote:
Maybe it's me, but I don't really find TBEGIN...TEND complex compared to other serializing techniques even when you factor in PPI while counting the number of attempts before taking the fallback path. The instructions within a transaction are typically less complex than the instructions you would need without a transaction, if you could even accomplish what you're trying to do outside of a transaction. For example, there is no need for CS, PLO. Just more straightforward "compare", "store", etc.
I agree, it's certainly much easier but it's still not *simple*. It requires several pages in PoPs to describe it, there's a parameter list, diagnostic block etc. That's not rocket science but I would prefer a compiler or libraries to do the hard work. Maybe I'm asking for too much but there is already a draft specification to make transactions quite simple from high-level languages http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3341.pdf. Some compilers have supported experimental constructs for transactional memory for a while http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/TransactionalMemory*. *The IBM C/C++ compiler already supports HTM instruction primitives as built-ins. I'm looking forward to when they implement the standard (Intel have already have an experimental implementation of the draft standard for Haswell).
---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
