StarMirror/CppCoreGuidelines
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines.git synced 2024-03-22 13:30:58 +08:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix 798177568e

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Andrew Pardoe 2016-10-03 15:37:56 -07:00
parent 798177568e
commit f66d9aea46
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
CppCoreGuidelines.md
View File

@ -12503,7 +12503,7 @@ Lock-free programming rule summary:
* how/when to use atomics
* avoid starvation
* use a lock free data structure rather than hand-crafting specific lock-free access
* [CP.110: Do not write your own double-checked locking for initialization](#Rconc-double-init)
* [CP.110: Do not write your own double-checked locking for initialization](#Rconc-double)
* [CP.111: Use a conventional pattern if you really need double-checked locking](#Rconc-double-pattern)
* how/when to compare and swap
@ -12581,7 +12581,7 @@ Become an expert before shipping lock-free code for others to use.
* Damian Dechev, Peter Pirkelbauer, Nicolas Rouquette, and Bjarne Stroustrup: Semantically Enhanced Containers for Concurrent Real-Time Systems. Proc. 16th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems (IEEE ECBS). April 2009.
### <a name="Rconc-double-init"></a>CP.110: Do not write your own double-checked locking for initialization
### <a name="Rconc-double"></a>CP.110: Do not write your own double-checked locking for initialization
##### Reason
@ -12628,7 +12628,7 @@ Example with thread-safe static local variables of C++11.
##### Reason
Double-checked locking is easy to mess up. If you really need to write your own double-checked locking, in spite of the rules [CP.110: Do not write your own double-checked locking for initialization](#Rconc-double-init) and [CP.100: Don't use lock-free programming unless you absolutely have to](#Rconc-lockfree), then do it in a conventional pattern.
Double-checked locking is easy to mess up. If you really need to write your own double-checked locking, in spite of the rules [CP.110: Do not write your own double-checked locking for initialization](#Rconc-double) and [CP.100: Don't use lock-free programming unless you absolutely have to](#Rconc-lockfree), then do it in a conventional pattern.
##### Example, bad