liblfds

8 ms·

31.
by liblfds 10y ago
Yes (and yes). == (Now done).
32.
by liblfds 10y ago
I didn't know! thanks! I have a Pi 2 right now for ARM32, I'm completely happy with it.
33.
by liblfds 10y ago
God, I'm old.
34.
by liblfds 10y ago
If it does not, how can you concurrently include and link against multiple versions of the library?
35.
by liblfds 10y ago
Could be. I will look into the choice before I commit - figuring out how one of these complex lock-free data structures works and implmenting it correctly and writing all the tests cases is a major undertaking. It's something you wan
36.
by liblfds 10y ago
Well, to be fair! the page does say this immediately above the matrix - "The following toolchains and processors are supported out-of-the-box" However, this is certainly not fully explanitative, and of course is just one line i
37.
by liblfds 10y ago
I think typedefs are almost always harmful. The explanation is longish and not directly related to the library, so I'll leave it at that. What I will say though is that the struct already has a type, so as far as I can tell, the benef
38.
by liblfds 10y ago
> This is what having consistent interfaces is for. Keep > your interface consistent, not your implementation. I have to disagree. If the underlying library used has changed, then the code which uses the library has to be revalidat
39.
by liblfds 10y ago
I know the author of CK, and he's very, very good. Better than me, I am sure of that! I believe CK offers a delete-supporting hash, too, so it has a full O(1), which liblfds does not yet have.
40.
by liblfds 10y ago
When you say "limitations", I'm not sure what you mean. I wonder if there's a misunderstanding here - the matrix describes the toolchains which are supported out-of-the-box , i.e. build files for them are provided, and
41.
by liblfds 10y ago
I've heard of Rust. People seem to like it. However, I am a C programmer and have always been a C programmer, and I write the library for the pleasure of it, so other languages don't really connect.
42.
by liblfds 10y ago
Indeed. It was with lawyers in mind I went for overkill on the licensing front. I wanted to wholly and completely remove that issue from consideration.
43.
by liblfds 10y ago
Yes. The reason for this is that every version of the library can be concurrently included and linked against. The reason for this is so that when a new version of the library is incorporated, existing code does not even have to be reval
44.
by liblfds 10y ago
Could you explain why this is the only way to use the library? why are typedefs essential for use?
45.
by liblfds 10y ago
Lock-free data structures are process, thread and interrupt safe (i.e. the same data structure instance can be safely used across processes, threads and both inside and outside of interrupt handlers).
46.
by liblfds 10y ago
Macros are heavily used to avoid making function calls. I'd glad you find it readable - I hope you're right :-)
47.
by liblfds 10y ago
Yes. I have seen the white paper for the red-black tree, and the approach used should work for AVL (I've not seen that paper). I've just not had time to implement yet. A full O(log n) data structure is necessary for the library
48.
by liblfds 10y ago
Yes, some of the identifiers are very long. The aim was to make the APIs self-explanatory. It should be possible to read an API and know what it does. It's challanging to explain an inorder walk, and its direction, in a shorter form
49.
by liblfds 10y ago
> The documentation is viewed via an embedded frame. So you > can't save URLs to the documentation. This is a known bad > practice for web sites. Yes and no. The site currently is arranged with a set of tabs on the left and
50.
by liblfds 10y ago
Interesting. Why did it turn you away? do you run code on many of the given platforms?
51.
by liblfds 10y ago
Yes and no. On Linux, the library uses the GCC atomic intrinsics. As such, the library funamentally supports any platform GCC supports with its atomic intrinsics. So the instructions are indeed machine specific, but they're provided
52.
by liblfds 10y ago
That's not the case. What you get depends only on the processor type. What does vary is whether or not any given platform has actually been tested - i.e. the code compiled on that platform, and the test programme run. Currently, only A
53.
by liblfds 10y ago
Good point. When the library was initially released, back in 2009, and until recently, it's been license-free, or at least thought to be. Recently with the addition of Dmitry's design, and a closer analysis of the possible licens
54.
Liblfds 7.1.0 release
2 points by liblfds 10y ago|1 comments