Home » Blog » Categories »

Valgrind 3.10.1 released

By Adrien Hamelin | Dec 3, 2014 01:43 PM | Tags: None

Valgrind, a useful tool for any C++ developer released a new version today:

Valgrind 3.10.1 released

From the announcement:

3.10.1 is a bug fix release. It fixes various bugs reported in 3.10.0 and backports fixes for all reported missing AArch64 ARMv8 instructions and syscalls from the trunk. If you package or deliver 3.10.0 for others to use, you might want to consider upgrading to 3.10.1 instead.

A gotcha with Boost.Optional --Andrzej Krzemieński

By Razvan Pascalau | Dec 3, 2014 11:50 AM | Tags: boost basics

Have you used the Boost.Optional library? There is one thing you might need to keep an eye on as explained by Andrzej.

  A gotcha with Optional

  by Andrzej Krzemieński

From the article:

This post is about one gotcha in Boost.Optional library. When starting to use it, you might get the impression that when you try to put optional<T> where T is expected, you will get a compile-time error. In most of the cases it is exactly so, but sometimes you may get really surprised...

Quick Q: Is an acquire_release fence enough for Dekker synchronization?--StackOverflow

By Jared Mulconry | Dec 2, 2014 11:25 PM | Tags: c++11 advanced

Quick A: No, because acq_rel doesn't prevent reordering a store to x followed by a load from y... seq_cst does.

Recently on SO:

Why isn't a C++11 acquire_release fence enough for Dekker synchronization?

The failure of Dekker-style synchronization is typically explained with reordering of instructions. I.e., if we write

atomic_int X;
atomic_int Y;
int r1, r2;
static void t1() {
    X.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed)
    r1 = Y.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}
static void t2() {
    Y.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed)
    r2 = X.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}

Then the loads can be reordered with the stores, leading to r1==r2==0.

I was expecting an acquire_release fence to prevent this kind of reordering:

static void t1() {
    X.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed);
    atomic_thread_fence(std::memory_order_acq_rel);
    r1 = Y.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}
static void t2() {
    Y.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed);
    atomic_thread_fence(std::memory_order_acq_rel);
    r2 = X.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}

The load cannot be moved above the fence and the store cannot be moved below the fence, and so the bad result should be prevented.

However, experiments show r1==r2==0 can still occur. Is there a reordering-based explanation for this? Where's the flaw in my reasoning?

Sneak Preview of C++17 -- Gabriel Ha

By kevstev | Dec 2, 2014 03:41 PM | Tags: None

A preview what is going into C++17 after the recent Standards Committee meeting. 

GoingNative 32: Sneak Preview of C++17

By Gabriel Ha

From the article: 

Join us with ISO Committee member (and Microsoft as well, of course =P) Gabriel Dos Reis, who graciously took the time to give us the inside scoop of some things that made it into C++17, as well as things that got taken out. All this is fresh off the press of the most recent C++ Standards Meeting...

 

 

C++ Has Become More Pythonic -- Jeff Preshing

By Daniel França | Dec 2, 2014 09:39 AM | Tags: python c++14 c++11

A nice article pointing out similarities between modern C++ and Python:

C++ Has Become More Pythonic

by Jeff Preshing

From the article:

C++ has changed a lot in recent years. The last two revisions, C++11 and C++14, introduce so many new features that, in the words of Bjarne Stroustrup, “It feels like a new language.”

It’s true. Modern C++ lends itself to a whole new style of programming – and you can’t help but feel Python’s influence on this new style. Ranged-based for loops, type deduction, vector and map initializers, lambda expressions. The more you explore modern C++, the more you find Python’s fingerprints all over it.

Was Python a direct influence on modern C++? Or did Python simply adopt a few common idioms before C++ got around to it? You be the judge...

Efficiency with Algorithms, Performance with Data Structures -- Chandler Carruth

By George Ryan | Dec 2, 2014 08:38 AM | Tags: performance c++14 c++11

carruth-cppcon2014.PNGAt the recent CppCon 2014, Chandler Carruth gave a great talk on using Modern C++ for writing high-performance applications. 

Efficiency with Algorithms, Performance with Data Structures

by Chandler Carruth

From the video introduction:

C++ programmers throughout the industry have an insatiable desire for writing high performance code. Unfortunately, even with C++, this can be really challenging. Over the past twenty years processors, memory, software libraries, and even compilers have radically changed what makes C++ code fast. Even measuring the performance of your code can be a daunting task. This talk will dig into how modern processors work, what makes them fast, and how to exploit them effectively with modern C++ code.

Quick Q: How do I add elements to a 2D vector of ints?--StackOverflow

By Jared Mulconry | Dec 2, 2014 03:56 AM | Tags: basics

Quick A: Index into the desired sub-vector and call push_back.

Recently on SO:

Inserting elements into 2D vector

So I'm creating a class that implements an adjacency list. Currently in my class definition I initialized two vectors:

vector<vector<int>> adjList;
vector<int> neighbors;

and I declared two functions that I plan to use to make it:

bool constructAdjList();
bool insertIntoAdjList(int, int);

It's getting difficult wrapping my head around 2D vectors. I understand that it is essentially a vector of vectors, but I'm confused about how to insert a new value into one of the "subvectors". For example, I am able to create an adjacency list in createAdjList that is empty with the following loop:

for (int i = 0; i < numOfValues; i++){
    neighbors.push_back(0);
    adjList.push_back(neighbors);
    neighbors.clear();
}

But how can I say, push_back the value 5 to the 4th vector in adjList, which would be represented in my insertIntoAdjList function as

insertIntoAdjList(4, 5);

I know I can access a specific value in a 2D vector by saying adjList[4][1], but how can I push one onto it?

Thanks!

A quick poll about order of evaluation -- Herb Sutter

By Blog Staff | Dec 1, 2014 01:48 PM | Tags: None

A quick Monday poll:

A quick poll about order of evaluation...

by Herb Sutter

From the article:

Consider this program fragment:

std::vector<int> v = { 0, 0 };
int i = 0;
v[i++] = i++;
std::cout << v[0] << v[1] << endl;

My question is not what it might print under today’s C++ rules. The third line runs afoul of two different categories of undefined and unspecified behavior.

Rather, my question is what you would like the result to be. Please let me know... [click for poll]

New optimizations for X86 in upcoming GCC 5.0 -- Evgeny Stupachenko

By Razvan Pascalau | Dec 1, 2014 07:11 AM | Tags: performance gcc efficiency compiler advanced

Fresh on the Intel Developer Zone blog:

New optimizations for X86 in upcoming GCC 5.0

by Evgeny Stupachenko

From the article:

Part 1. Vectorization of loads/stores group.

GCC 5.0 significantly improves vector code quality for load groups and store groups. By loads/stores group I mean iterated consecutive sequence of loads/stores. For example:

x = a[i], y = a[i + 1], z = a[i + 2] iterated by “i” is loads group of size 3

...

The most frequent case where loads/stores groups are applicable is array of structures.
  1. Image conversion (RGB structure to some other) ...
  2. N-dimentional coordinates. (Normalize array of XYZ points) ...
  3. Multiplication of vectors by constant matrix: ...

... GCC 5.0:

  1. Introduces vectorization of load/store groups of size 3
  2. Improves load groups vectorization for all supported sizes
  3. Maximizes load/store groups performance by generating code that is more optimal for particular x86 CPU...