Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Luca Risolia <luca.risolia@studio.unibo.it>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.programming.threads
Subject: Re: Why is java consumer/producer so much faster than C++
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 00:33:10 +0200
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <jukjf6$d5a$2@speranza.aioe.org>
References: <juht3o$a3a$1@news.albasani.net> <ba6e5833-f9a2-428e-815b-aad0ebdf3c55@s6g2000pbi.googlegroups.com> <jui2a3$a3a$2@news.albasani.net> <jui4cg$d5a$1@speranza.aioe.org> <juj8ca$ges$1@news.albasani.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: Z2aAaWHo3goDty2MP7NWgA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:17211 comp.programming.threads:971

On 23/07/2012 12:17, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> (On a side note, the C++ version you have given does not have the
>> best possible interface for a thread-safe queue)
>
> I have just copied Java BlockingQueue interface, which is of course
> suited for Java. Don't know actually how ideal interface would look
> like.

In C++11 the ideal interface for a generic thread-safe and 
exception-safe queue should at least provide std::shared_ptr<T> take() 
and/or void take(T&). T take() is limited to those types having no-throw 
copy constructors or move-constructors. This also means that you should 
check the type at compile-time by using type traits. However, in your 
test case you used move-semantic everywhere, so that is not problem. 
Also note that the term "pop" instead of "take" is more in the spirit of 
C++.