> On Oct 12, 2011, at 2:55 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: >> I wouldn't really mind having the compiler produce an error for types >> it can't make lock-free. Then users can't use atomics of a size that >> would need an external library. > > Okay, but that's obviously not a real option. Feel free to implement > and pass -Werror=locked-atomics.
It's not a real long-term option. I think it's a real option for the next release of gcc and clang, so that we have more than two weeks to figure out what the right ABI should be for the next decade. Jeffrey _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
