Re: [Development] std::allocate_shared for QSharedPointer

2017-09-12 Thread Konstantin Tokarev
13.09.2017, 04:40, "Ed Leaver" : > What??? You mean there's actually a reason people aren't knocking the doors > down over these things? =-O > > A few months ago I was handed a C++ Coding Standard that deigned to prohibit > any further heap allocation after program

Re: [Development] std::allocate_shared for QSharedPointer

2017-09-12 Thread Ed Leaver
/What??? /You mean there's actually a /reason/ people aren't knocking the doors down over these things? =-O A few months ago I was handed a C++ Coding Standard that deigned to prohibit any further heap allocation after program initialization. It was originally intended for a hard real-time

Re: [Development] std::allocate_shared for QSharedPointer

2017-09-12 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Monday, 11 September 2017 17:45:01 PDT Ed Leaver wrote: > Have any of you experience with jemalloc or TCMalloc? > http://goog-perftools.sourceforge.net/doc/tcmalloc.html Yes. I don't remember which of the two allocators or the details, but I remember one of them had a huge thread-safety

Re: [Development] std::allocate_shared for QSharedPointer

2017-09-12 Thread Konstantin Tokarev
Don't challenge your allocator, just use intrusive reference counting (e.g. QSharedData) 12.09.2017, 03:45, "Ed Leaver" : > Have any of you experience with jemalloc or TCMalloc? > http://goog-perftools.sourceforge.net/doc/tcmalloc.html > > On 09/10/2017 08:26 AM, Thiago