[cpp-threads] atomic operations package

[Peter Dimov]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> On 8/23/05, Boehm, Hans <hans.boehm at hp.com> wrote:

>> 1) You make the ordering constraint a run-time parameter, and I make
>> it a member template parameter.  My guess is that you almost never
>> want it to be a runtime parameter.
>
> It's not really meant to be a run-time parameter. It just takes a bit
> less characters and is more readable IMO.

I prefer the "runtime" formulation and not using an atomic<> template 
because this keeps the syntax C-compatible. The atomics should - in my 
opinion - be implemented as compiler intrinsics; these are usually shared 
between the C and C++ compiler.

The C people would never accept the <> syntax. They hate templates with a 
passion. :-)

atomic_load( &v, msync_acq )

is C-friendly. (That's also why v is passed by pointer and not by 
reference.)