Differentiating between queue full and queue empty

I am using a an array with a write index and a read index to impl开发者_开发技巧ement a straightforward FIFO Queue. I do the usual MOD ArraySize when incrementing the write and read index. Is there a way to differentiate between queue full and queue empty condition (wrIndex == rdIndex) without using any additional queuecount and also without wasting any array entry i.e . Queue is full if (WrIndex + 1 ) MOD ArraySize == ReadIndex

---

I'd go with 'wasting' an array entry to detect the queue full condition, especially if you're dealing with different threads/tasks being producers and consumers. Having another flag keep track of that situation increases the locking necessary to keep things consistent and increases the likelihood of some sort of bug that introduces a race condition. This is even more true in the case where you can't use a critical section (as you mention in a comment) to ensure that things are in-sync.

You'll need at least a bit somewhere to keep track of that condition, and that probably means at least a byte. Assuming that your queue contains ints you're only saving 3 bytes of RAM and you're going to chew up several more bytes of program image (which might not be as precious, so that might not matter). If you keep a flag bit inside a byte used to store other flag bits, then you have to additionally deal with setting/testing/clearing that flag bit in a thread safe manner to ensure that the other bits don't get corrupted.

If you're queuing bytes, then you probably save nothing - you can consider the sentinel element to be the flag that you'd have to put somewhere else. But now you have to have no extra code to deal with the flag.

Consider carefully if you really need that extra queue item, and keep in mind that if you're queuing bytes, then the extra queue item probably isn't really extra space

---

Instead of a read and write index, you could use a read index and a queue count. From the queue count, you can easily tell if the queue is empty of full. And the write index can be computed as (read index + queue count) mod array_size.

---

What's wrong with a queue count? It sounds like you're going for maximum efficiency and minimal logic, and while I would do the same, I think I'd still use a queue count variable. Otherwise, one other potential solution would be to use a linked list. Low memory usage, and removing first element would be easy, just make sure that you have pointers to the head and tail of the list.

---

Basically you only need a single additional bit somewhere to signal that the queue is currently empty. You can probably stash that away somewhere, e.g., in the most significant bit of one of your indices (and than AND-ing the lower bits creatively in places where you need to work only on the actual index into your array).

But honestly, I'd go with a queue count first and only cut that if I really need that space, instead of putting up with bit fiddling.