https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6651 <p> Looking over current state of lockfree algorithms I've noticed a number of problems. For example, the lockfree FIFO by Tim Blechmann, reviewed by Harmut, has a typical error. The enqueue function updates the 'next' pointer of a node that may have been removed from the list. Indeed, the code is nonfunctional. It creates the list with a dummy node which will be dequeued first. In general, the <a class="missing wiki">Michael/Scott</a> code and derivatives are flawed. </p> <p> Yet, it would be quite useful to have lockfree, multithreaded libraries for standard containers. </p> <p> Ray Gronek rkgronek@… </p> en-us /htdocs/site/boost.png https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6651 Trac 1.4.3 Ion Gaztañaga Sat, 24 Mar 2012 16:25:51 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6651#comment:1 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6651#comment:1 <ul> <li><strong>status</strong> <span class="trac-field-old">new</span> → <span class="trac-field-new">closed</span> </li> <li><strong>resolution</strong> → <span class="trac-field-new">worksforme</span> </li> </ul> <p> Sorry, but this has nothing to do with Boost.Interprocess. Ping Tim Blechmann for further discussion. </p> Ticket