www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Threadsafe singleton using volatile,synchonized

reply BLS <nanali foo.fr> writes:
Probabely I should use D-Learn instead but due to the fact that it is about
compiler optimizing ... blah, blah ; Simple question : Is this singleton
implementation thread safe ?  Makes : 
static volatile Singleton _instance
sense ?

module pattern.singleton

class Singleton 
{
public:
	static Singleton getInstance()
	{
		// double check lock
        if (_instance is null)
		{
			synchronized {
                if (_instance is null) 
				{
                    _instance = new Singleton();
                }
            }
        }
        return _instance;      
    }
private:
	this() {} 
	
	// do not optimize  
	static volatile Singleton _instance;
}

Bjoern
May 26 2007
next sibling parent reply Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:
BLS wrote:

 Probabely I should use D-Learn instead but due to the fact that it is about
compiler optimizing ... blah, blah ; Simple question : Is this singleton
implementation thread safe ?  Makes : 
 static volatile Singleton _instance
 sense ?
 
 module pattern.singleton
 
 class Singleton 
 {
 public:
 	static Singleton getInstance()
 	{
 		// double check lock
         if (_instance is null)
 		{
 			synchronized {
                 if (_instance is null) 
 				{
                     _instance = new Singleton();
                 }
             }
         }
         return _instance;      
     }
 private:
 	this() {} 
 	
 	// do not optimize  
 	static volatile Singleton _instance;
 }



No.  The 'volatile' qualifier is applied to a statement, not a variable. 
  You need to do something like this:
























This is from:

http://www.digitalmars.com/pnews/read.php?server=news.digitalmars.com&group=digitalmars.D&artnum=9260

in thread:

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/9149.html#N9231


Sean
May 26 2007
parent reply BLS <nanali foo.fr> writes:
Thanks Sean, indeed a very interesting thread.
From 2004;It is really worth to browse the archives!
What is the reason/rationale for using volatile in this way ?
 
Another Question:
Is something like this available 

CriticalSectionBegin()
{
// Your Single thread code goes here
}
CriticalSectionEnd()

Bjoern 

Sean Kelly Wrote:


 BLS wrote:

 Probabely I should use D-Learn instead but due to the fact that it is about
compiler optimizing ... blah, blah ; Simple question : Is this singleton
implementation thread safe ?  Makes : 
 static volatile Singleton _instance
 sense ?
 
 module pattern.singleton
 
 class Singleton 
 {
 public:
 	static Singleton getInstance()
 	{
 		// double check lock
         if (_instance is null)
 		{
 			synchronized {
                 if (_instance is null) 
 				{
                     _instance = new Singleton();
                 }
             }
         }
         return _instance;      
     }
 private:
 	this() {} 
 	
 	// do not optimize  
 	static volatile Singleton _instance;
 }


 
 
 No.  The 'volatile' qualifier is applied to a statement, not a variable. 
   You need to do something like this:
 






















 
 This is from:
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/pnews/read.php?server=news.digitalmars.com&group=digitalmars.D&artnum=9260
 
 in thread:
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/9149.html#N9231
 
 
 Sean
May 26 2007
parent Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:
BLS wrote:

 Thanks Sean, indeed a very interesting thread.
 From 2004;It is really worth to browse the archives!
 What is the reason/rationale for using volatile in this way ?


In D, 'volatile' is a statement rather than a storage attribute.  So you 
need to use it explicitly in places where you want to restrict 
compiler-based code movement.  In the code below, a temporary is used to 
  ensure that Singleton (s) is fully constructed before s is set, 
otherwise the compiler could theoretically do this:

s = new Singleton;

// translates to

s = allocate_memory for Singleton;
s.ctor();

The presence of 'volatile' is to ensure that the compiler doesn't try to 
eliminate 'tmp' entirely and just use 's', since that would be a legal 
optimization.


 Another Question:
 Is something like this available 
 
 CriticalSectionBegin()
 {
 // Your Single thread code goes here
 }
 CriticalSectionEnd()


Other than synchronized? Could you provide more detail?


Sean
May 27 2007
prev sibling parent Dejan Lekic <dejan.lekic gmail.com> writes:
 
 CriticalSectionBegin()
 {
 // Your Single thread code goes here
 }
 CriticalSectionEnd()


synchronized {} does exactly that IMHO.
May 30 2007