Am Thursday 03 December 2009 19:18:10 schrieb Andrey Semashev:
Oliver Kowalke wrote:
I believe Helge's plan was to provide an implementation of C++-0x atomics - PODs are not part of the 'atomic' interface - so I would vote against PODs.
My bad. I was under impression that these functions operate on integral types rather than classes. Sorry.
Supporting PODs is probably not possible in a portable fashion -- there may be architectures that simply cannot read/write bytes individually (for example Cell SPU always reads/writes 16 bytes at a time), so an "atomic" uint8_t placed in the same word as a "non-atomic" uint8_t simply won't work (I don't think atomic<uint8_t> is required to be one byte in size and may therefore provide requisite "padding"). Helge