Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "074cc591".
2016 Feb 27
0
[isocpp-parallel] Proposal for new memory_order_consume definition
...the
right answer is not to turn the other cheek.
And undefined behavior is pretty much *always* a sign of "the standard is
wrong".
Linus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160227/074cc591/attachment.html>
2016 Feb 27
4
[isocpp-parallel] Proposal for new memory_order_consume definition
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 04:46:50PM -0800, Hans Boehm wrote:
> If carries_dependency affects semantics, then it should not be an attribute.
I am not picky about the form of the marking.
> The original design, or at least my understanding of it, was that it not
> have semantics; it was only a suggestion to the compiler that it should
> preserve dependencies instead of inserting a fence