alexshap added a comment.

> is that a problem for your codebase?

@zaks.anna  - yes it is.

> Another possible issue is that we will use the synthesized body if the 
> function name starts with "OSAtomicCompareAndSwap" since ?>we do not match 
> the full function name. If the function body is available, there is a higher 
> chance it is implementing something other >than the standard compare and 
> swap. We might want to start matching the full names of the functions are are 
> synthesizing.

yeah - i've just wanted to post a comment about it - btw - 
OSAtomicCompareAndSwap is not the only example (dispatch_sync, dispatch_async 
etc also create a problem). But in my case i ran into issue on the exact match 
(but on the other function).

I have not updated this patch yet because I have not found a good solution - 
still thinking (any suggestions appreciated). I probably understand the 
motivation behind the changes introduced in r264687 but yes, it causes several 


cfe-commits mailing list

Reply via email to