[cpp-threads] RE: "Agenda" for august 23-25 concurrency meeting

[Nick Maclaren]

"Alexander Terekhov" <alexander.terekhov at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I am not at all surprised that POSIX semaphores behave the same way,
> > as I have reported ad tedium that it needs a memory model and doesn't
> 
> Well, doesn't x86/ia-32 also in need of a memory model? :-)

Very likely, but I prefer to avoid getting down to that level unless
I have to.  For the past decade, I have been managing/supporting/etc.
supercomputers, and that has only just become relevant.  In any case,
I have been writing portable code for 35+ years, and the language
standards are what really matter for that.

> > have one.  Whether semaphores SHOULD be globally consistent is another
> > matter - there are arguments both ways.
> 
> http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag-review/msg01962.html
> http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag/msg08582.html

Quite.  And the best of British to you. [*]  My experience with trying
to get even simple issues attended to in that forum is that anything
that might break any one of the consortium's owners' implementations
is a total no-no.


[*] That means "good luck, but I don't think that you have the hope
of a flea in a furnace" in somewhat outdated UK idiom.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
Email:  nmm1 at cam.ac.uk
Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679