Re: An argument against (the liberal use of) references

From	Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: An argument against (the liberal use of) references
Date	2022-12-07 09:05 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<tmpl1b$1pke$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <tm7gjh$2hau4$1@dont-email.me> <tm9iig$1can$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tm9khr$2oi11$3@dont-email.me> <tmn9fl$1kpl$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tmo8ho$ahd1$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/6/2022 3:36 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> wrote:
>>> When tracking down this bug, I monitored all refcounter changes for a
>>> particular single smartpointer during the program run (ca 10 min). There
>>> were 591848 increments and decrements, from which 1526 came from the
>>> problematic (parallelized) part. It looks like a pessimization to slow
>>> down 99.75% of accesses when only 0.25% would actually benefit from this.
> [...]
>> So unless your smart pointer is being copied and assigned around
>> millions of times per second in tight number-crunching loops, you can
>> safely ignore any lost clock cycles by making the reference counter
>> thread-safe.
> [...]
> A thread-safe reference counted pointer can heavily damage performance 
> in certain usage scenarios. Blasting the system with memory barriers and 
> atomic RMW ops all over the place.

If you really need to copy/assign smart pointers in tight number-crunching
inner loops, then perhaps *don't* copy/assign such smart pointers in such
loops (or use any smart pointers for that matter)?

In scenarios that don't require the last clock cycles squeezed out of
them, does a "memory barrier" or other optimization hindrances really
matter all that much? If code that takes 0.01% of the total runtime
gets 1% slower... how much will it slow down the overall program?
Do the math.

Thread

An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-11-22 09:52 +0000
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@KVI.nl> - 2022-11-22 11:23 +0100
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-11-22 13:27 +0200
    Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-11-23 06:52 +0000
      Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-11-23 13:51 +0100
        Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-11-23 13:46 +0000
          Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-11-30 13:59 +0200
            Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-12-01 06:45 +0000
              Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-01 09:19 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Stuart Redmann <DerTopper@web.de> - 2022-12-01 14:06 +0100
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-01 16:45 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-01 16:02 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-01 20:21 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-01 19:09 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-12-02 05:53 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-02 14:36 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 12:29 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-02 20:55 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 12:58 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-02 21:18 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 14:16 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> - 2022-12-02 21:09 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 13:22 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> - 2022-12-02 21:36 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 14:13 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-02 18:33 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-12-01 11:59 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-01 23:53 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-12-02 04:11 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-01 12:21 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-12-06 11:36 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-06 12:26 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-06 20:39 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-06 23:53 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-06 13:59 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-06 22:04 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-06 21:38 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-07 15:22 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-07 18:37 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-06 14:01 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-12-07 09:05 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-07 12:48 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-07 12:50 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-12-08 07:52 +0000
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-08 05:50 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-12-08 13:30 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-09 12:50 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-11 12:18 +0100
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-12-08 13:38 +0200
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-08 16:45 -0800
                Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-12-09 04:35 -0800
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-22 15:36 +0100
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2022-11-22 15:21 +0000
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-22 10:48 -0500
    Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-22 13:18 -0800
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references El Jo <giorgio.zoppi@gmail.com> - 2022-11-22 13:41 -0800
    Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-22 13:51 -0800
  Re: An argument *against* (the liberal use of) references Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-23 20:08 +0100

csiph-web