search for: unsafety

...to build higher level locking constructs. Is > that the plan here too? It seems like you'd want to avoid anything too > fancy since LLVM has to run on so many different architectures with > their variety of memory semantics, etc. I totally agree. However, at least one case of thread-unsafety (ManagedStatic), has proven very-difficult-to-impossible to implement correctly without using lower-level operations. --Owen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4463 bytes Desc: not available URL:...

...n the rare case that as.integer() is applied explicitly onto a factor, the warning is not needed, but certainly not as disastrous as in the other case. Probably, in a future version of R, an option similar to that for partial matches of subscripts might be useful to change the default from maximal unsafety to safe use.

...locking constructs. Is >> that the plan here too? It seems like you'd want to avoid anything too >> fancy since LLVM has to run on so many different architectures with >> their variety of memory semantics, etc. > > I totally agree. However, at least one case of thread-unsafety > (ManagedStatic), has proven very-difficult-to-impossible to implement > correctly without using lower-level operations. > Yes, double-checked locking is a pain. There's a C++ safe implementation in http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel/DoubleCheckedLocking.html in the &...

...t; that the plan here too? It seems like you'd want to avoid anything >>> too >>> fancy since LLVM has to run on so many different architectures with >>> their variety of memory semantics, etc. >> >> I totally agree. However, at least one case of thread-unsafety >> (ManagedStatic), has proven very-difficult-to-impossible to implement >> correctly without using lower-level operations. >> > > Yes, double-checked locking is a pain. There's a C++ safe > implementation > in > http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel/Do...

Owen Anderson wrote: > Some of you may have noticed that I addedd include/llvm/System/Atomics.h > to the repository briefly, which will be used for adding support for > threading in LLVM. Just out of curiosity, is there a design document somewhere for the plan for threading? Also, atomic ops are usually pretty low level things used for nonblocking algorithms or to build higher level

Some of you may have noticed that I addedd include/llvm/System/ Atomics.h to the repository briefly, which will be used for adding support for threading in LLVM. I have tried to provided appropriate implementations of the atomic ops (currently memory fence and CAS) for platforms we care about, but my knowledge of these, and my ability to test them, is limited. So, please, if you run on

>Пятница, 17 июля 2020, 19:42 +03:00 от David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>: > >On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:03 AM Fangrui Song < maskray at google.com > wrote: >> >> Thanks for the write-up! >> >> On 2020-07-16, David Blaikie wrote: >> >In short: Perhaps we should switch lld to the bfd-style tombstoning >> >behavior for a release or