[cpp-threads] Failed compare-and-swap

[Lawrence Crowl]

On 8/2/07, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 12:07:08AM -0000, Boehm, Hans wrote:
> > I'm confused.  I thought we had success and failure orders, not read and
> > write orders.  If you go with read/write, you can't drop the acquire
> > constraint on failure, which is probably the most (only?) interesting
> > case in practice, right?
>
> Color me confused.  :-/  I let the argument names of "r" and "w" distract
> me from the true semantics of the arguments.
>
> > If we have success and failure orders, it seems more natural to me to
> > list the success case first, which also seems optimal in terms of
> > overloads.
>
> I agree.  The success-order argument should precede the failure-order
> argument.

Well, it appears that no one is arguing in favor of the other order.
I was, before Peter's suggestion, but not after.  :-)

-- 
Lawrence Crowl