[cpp-threads] RE: volatile, memory models, threads

[Peter Dimov]

Nick Maclaren wrote:
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov at mmltd.net> wrote:

>> 3.9.3/1 seems pretty clear to me, sorry. :-)
>
> It seems pretty clear to me, too.  But incompatibly.

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that I agree that one _could_ read 
3.9.3/1 your way; but to argue that it _clearly_ speaks of value 
representation, when alignment requirements are mentioned in the same 
sentence - values don't have alignment, objects do - seems to go a bit too 
far.

Although I concede that _in principle_ you could have a const int with size 
4 and alignment 2, and an int with size 2 and alignment 2...

> Look, this is getting ridiculous.