On 11/14/12 12:04 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Nov 14, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu<[email protected]>
wrote:
First, there are more kinds of atomic loads and stores. Then, the fact that the
calls are not supposed to be reordered must be a guarantee of the language, not
a speculation about an implementation. We can't argue that a feature works just
because it so happens an implementation works a specific way.
I've always been a fan of release consistency, and it dovetails well with the
behavior of mutexes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Release_consistency). It
would be cool if we could sort out transactional memory as well, but that's not
a short term thing.
I think we should focus on sequential consistency as that's where the
industry is converging.
Andrei
