On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:12 PM, L. David Baron <dba...@dbaron.org> wrote: > The issue here is whether this particular way of writing threadsafe > code leads people modifying that code to make mistakes because they > don't even notice that it's threadsafe code.
I completely agree. And because using the current Atomic code obscures the need to be concerned about threadsafety, I strongly support Ehsan's proposal. >> > >As I said in the bug, all this is saying is that thread safety is hard, >> > >and atomics are merely one of the tools to achieve thread safety. They >> > >are not a magic wand that fixes thread safety. >> > >> > Did you read <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=987887#c20>? >> >> Did you read my answer to that comment? > > I think you're continuing to ignore the fact that using operator > overloading obscures what those operators are doing underneath, and > when that difference is important to the reader of the code, > overloading might not be a good idea. +Infinity - Kyle _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
