On 07/11/2016 03:23 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
I think I would prefer if the compiler would generate atomic operations,
Backpedaling on that one.
With automatic atomic loads and stores, one could accidentally write this:
shared int x;
x = x + 1; /* atomic load + atomic != atomic increment */
Easy to miss the problem, because the code looks so innocent.
But when the atomic loads and stores must be spelled out it would look
like in my original post:
shared int x;
atomicStore(x, atomicLoad(x) + 1);
Way more obvious that the code isn't actually thread-safe.
So now I'm leaning towards requiring the verbose version.
