On 09/11/14 18:56, NightStrike wrote: > Is it a bug that I can atomically store a float using __atomic_store, > but not __atomic_store_n? I'd really like to be able to do it without > the extra layer of indirection and the extra requirement of a temp > variable that I don't need. I don't get this. Can you explain a bit more, or provide a test case? There shouldn't be any loss of performance. Andrew.
