Timeline for Win7 atomic access class
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 9, 2012 at 11:19 | comment | added | Corbin |
@KonradRudolph Ah ok, thanks. I thought it would silently do: type x; x.operator=(...); Did not realize it would do type x(...);. Been a while since I've done anything more than a few lines of C++ :).
|
|
| Jun 9, 2012 at 11:09 | comment | added | Konrad Rudolph |
@Corbin it is, but type x = … would invoke copy construction, never copy assignment. But it’s always optimised anyway so that no copy is made, ever. But note that the copy constructor needs to be available anyway.
|
|
| Jun 8, 2012 at 22:51 | comment | added | Corbin | @JakubZaverka "The assignment operator works for me, if I declare it as a class field and assign a value in the constructor." It works for now. But when you clobber one of the CRITICAL_SECTIONs with a different CRITICAL_SEECTION all kinds of weird bugs can happen later. | |
| Jun 8, 2012 at 22:46 | comment | added | Corbin |
@KonradRudolph That explains it then. I had always thought that converting type x = ...; to type x (...) was an optional optimization.
|
|
| Jun 8, 2012 at 16:00 | comment | added | Jakub Zaverka |
And I now realized I don't even have operator=(AtomicAccess), I have operator=(aa_type). (I am assigning value at initialisation and then only ++ing or --ing.)
|
|
| Jun 8, 2012 at 15:48 | comment | added | Jakub Zaverka | And other remarks do not lack relevance as well. Thanks. Just one clarification: The way I intend to design it is only through typedefs. So if I typedef int_aa, then I want int_aa to behave in every way (or at least in ways I need) as a normal integer, but with synchronized access. The code using it should neved use the AtomicAccess class directly. | |
| Jun 8, 2012 at 15:44 | comment | added | Jakub Zaverka | The assignment operator works for me, if I declare it as a class field and assign a value in the constructor. And I also don't want to copy Critical sections. They are meant only as a necessary evil and if I do the assignment from one AtomicAcess to another, then the inner value should be copied only. This is a good remark, thanks, even though I have no such assignments in the code. | |
| Jun 8, 2012 at 9:56 | comment | added | Konrad Rudolph |
Assignment operator is never invoked in an initialisation. That explains why int_aa x = 5; doesn’t work.
|
|
| Jun 8, 2012 at 1:49 | history | answered | Corbin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |