Jarrett Billingsley Wrote: > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:47 AM, redsea <[email protected]> wrote: > > When I implement some high performance program in linux 32bit, 32bit atomic > > if often not sufficient, for example, If I want to hold a index & a > > timestamp to a atomic variable, 32bit is not enough, in 64bit environment, > > I can do that. > > > > > > ..Congratulations?
You mean scope & RAII ? Yes, it works, very well, thanks Walter. I test some dstress fail test case too, according to http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/ldc/tests/dmd-1.038-dstress1601/fail.html scope_06_M is also fixed, but some case with goto still failed. scope_06_M in run/s/scope_06_M.d ok now scope_13_A in run/s/scope_13_A.d still no ok, but Walter said it is not a bug. scope_14_A in run/s/scope_14_A.d scope_14_B in run/s/scope_14_B.d scope_14_C in run/s/scope_14_C.d scope_14_E in run/s/scope_14_E.d scope_17_A in run/s/scope_17_A.d failed scope_17_C in run/s/scope_17_C.d failed scope_17_D in run/s/scope_17_D.d other ones can not pass compile (so I wouldn't be afraid of them). And 17_A, 17_C is using goto combine scope/RAII, so, if we avoid the use of goto, we could be safe.
