Hello Eric, Tuesday, May 8, 2007, 10:03:40 PM, you wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Looks like this change is causing a linker error on at least one platform.
So this is the i386 problem (why is this the default for g++ in this day and age remains a mystery to me). We can fix it on the atomic_count side by supplying an assembly implementation that assumes 486+ regardless of the target, as is done with sp_counted_base. Or we can run the SunOS tests for i486 or better. Which one should be it?
I'm not familiar with "the i386 problem". Is there an easy way to reuse the solution for sp_counted_base? Seems to me like we should be consistent, but it's ultimately your call.
Why can't we use the old atomic_count and sp_counted_base implementations (i.e. asm, atomicity.h and interlocked functions)? -- Best regards, Andrey mailto:andysem@mail.ru