On 11/14/12 12:00 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Nov 14, 2012, at 6:16 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org>
wrote:
On 11/14/12 1:20 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/13/2012 11:37 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
If the compiler should/does not add memory barriers, then is there a
reason for
having it built into the language? Can a library solution be enough?
Memory barriers can certainly be added using library functions.
The compiler must understand the semantics of barriers such as e.g. it doesn't
hoist code above an acquire barrier or below a release barrier.
That was the point of the now deprecated "volatile" statement. I still don't
entirely understand why it was deprecated.
Because it's better to associate volatility with data than with code.
Andrei
