| Thread overview | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
June 09, 2015 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei@erdani.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|unspecified |D2 -- | |||
Permalink
ReplyJune 14, 2017 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 Russel Winder <russel@winder.org.uk> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |russel@winder.org.uk -- | |||
June 14, 2017 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 z.p.gaal.devel@gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |https://issues.dlang.org/sh | |ow_bug.cgi?id=15007 -- | |||
May 29, 2022 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 Richard Cattermole <alphaglosined@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |alphaglosined@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Richard Cattermole <alphaglosined@gmail.com> --- GDC has intrinsic support. It also supports GCC's libatomic and a special platform-specific mutex based upon what the hardware supports. As of this writing, unless we can guarantee that zero function calls will be emitted by core.atomic, it isn't fit for purpose. With lock-free concurrent data structures, unless you are inlining the instructions, you will almost certainly be working with old and potentially obsolete information. It results in segfaults. There is no way around this. As a result of this, an atomic type qualifier would be better suited which is not syntax suger for function calls. -- | |||
May 29, 2022 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 rm <rdm@e.email> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rdm@e.email -- | |||
December 17, 2022 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@gdcproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P1 |P4 -- | |||
December 13 [Issue 13713] core.atomic should use compiler intrinsics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
 | https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13713 --- Comment #2 from dlangBugzillaToGithub <robert.schadek@posteo.de> --- THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB https://github.com/dlang/dmd/issues/18910 DO NOT COMMENT HERE ANYMORE, NOBODY WILL SEE IT, THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB -- | |||
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation