On 06/20/2011 03:53 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > On 06/20/2011 06:33 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > If you want to standardize it with SYNC_ for all cases, I will create all > the new ones that way.
I do think the name of all the bits related to handling a builtin function should match the builtin function itself. It's less confusing that way. > I'm trying to avoid unnecessary noise on the branch. I'm bringing the > cxx-mem-model branch up to mainline revision now, so I can go and > submit a patch to fix the existing ones right now on mainline if you > want... turn them all into BUILT_IN_SYNC_LOCK_TEST_AND_SET or > whatever they need to be to match... then it will be right and wont > affect me at all :-) If you'd like to rename the existing stuff on mainline while you're waiting for something else to run, please do. r~
