This is still unresolved.
See message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (subject "Re: request for comments: new atomic API", 9/15/2003 9:21 PM EST) for where a previous conversation on this was left dangling.
re: apr_atomic_inc32()
IMHO, this guy just *has* to return information to specify whether or not the value became non-zero due to this thread's call. I'll dig into this (i.e., fix the declarations and leave most of the platforms broken :) ) unless somebody has some objection to the idea.
re: apr_atomic_add32(),apr_atomic_sub32()
Maybe the answer is that if the app needs the information that could have been returned by APR, it can just use apr_atomic_cas32(), and it is fine to have these void functions (though is anybody really going to use them?).
