Joshua Cranmer wrote: > On 1/27/2013 11:48 PM, Brian Smith wrote: > > FWIW, in cases like this, I would rather we just use the C++11 API > > directly even if it means dropping support for common but > > out-of-date compilers like gcc 4.4 and VS2010. > > I personally prefer an API style where the memory ordering > constraints of a variable are part of the type declaration as > opposed to an optional parameter on the access methods > (which means operator overloading will only ever give you > sequentially consistent).
OK, I didn't realize you were proposing the new API as a permanent replacement/wrapper of the C++11 API. If the Mozilla Coding Style Guide is going to discourage the use of the C++11 API permanently anyway even after all supported compilers provide it, then it doesn't really matter how the Mozilla-specific API is implemented. Cheers, Brian _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
