Re: Atomic caching of smart pointers

Am 16.09.2024 um 08:01 schrieb Paavo Helde:

Meanwhile I think I found a bug in my posted code, I should probably
use compare_exchange_strong() instead of compare_exchange_weak().

Usually you loop with compare_exchange_xxx() if the word in memory has
changed. Re-evaluating the changed data may take some time. Therefore
there's compare_exchange_weak() which loops itself when the word hasn't
changed. It's better to use it if your re-evaluation after a false
-result may take some time and you plan to compile your code on a
machine with load-linked / store-conditional. On x86-CPUs both
functions are the same.