cameron314

4 ms·

1.
by cameron314 12y ago
Yes, it is essentially an abstraction over a collection of SPMC queues (when using tokens to dequeue, it is actually a bit smart in that it tries to pair producers with consumers where possible). If you wrapped every enqueue operation in a
2.
by cameron314 12y ago
You're certainly right that it's not the minimum amount of complexity. But it's not that hard to implement a simple MPMC queue (e.g. if you can assume DCAS on your platform) -- what's hard is making it fast. So part of t
3.
by cameron314 12y ago
It's a matter of personal coding style preference. That's all :-) I like to document which functions I'd prefer to be inlined. It should make no difference in the output, since I believe all the methods are implicitly 'i
4.
by cameron314 12y ago
Of course it requires fences. It wouldn't be correct otherwise, and would probably not pass the tests even on x86, thanks to compiler re-ordering.
5.
by cameron314 12y ago
Yes. I hadn't looked at the disruptor pattern until yesterday, and I still don't fully understand it. I designed this queue from scratch.
6.
by cameron314 12y ago
I consider it a queue, despite its non-linearizability. I'll quote from my README where I addressed this concern: One particular consequence of this design (which seems to be non-intuitive) is that if two producers enqueue at the same
7.
by cameron314 12y ago
1. It is complicated, and, of course, with any complex code comes the possibility of bugs (especially when threads are involved!). I'd love to have a formal proof myself, but it's not a simple undertaking -- the sheer number of po
8.
A Fast General-Purpose Lock-Free Queue for C++(moodycamel.com)
59 points by cameron314 12y ago|22 comments