by "Peter Dimov" <pdimov@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Apr 11, 2005 at 02:48 PM
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> < Forward Inline >
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
> Subject: shared_ptr on ia64?
> Message-ID: <4255091E.8EFFEE2A@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> References: ... <011901c5394e$3ec2e700$6501a8c0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Peter Dimov wrote:
> [...]
>>> P.S. When are you going to kick start an incarnation for Itanic
>>> with value dependent cmpxchg.rel-vs-cmpxchg.acq? ;-)
>>
>> IA64 assembly by hand? No thanks. I'll probably use _Interlocked* on
>> Intel and __sync_* on g++.
>
> That would mean expensive "mf" everywhere.
The _Interlocked* family does have _acq/_rel variants (but I'm not sure
whether they are available on all versions of the Intel compiler), but g++
only implements __sync_* (and only a subset of that IIUC.)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2005-04/msg00059.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2005-04/msg00060.html
>
> Not good for Itanic which re****tedly speculates and reorders like
> crazy.
And is re****tedly dead. ;-)
