On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Andrew Haley wrote: > Perhaps so. However, it would make more sense and be more maintainable > if, rather than use a command-line option, a variable attribute was used > to tell the compiler what this program is supposed to mean. IMO. Correction: this can't be a variable attribute, because when you take a pointer to such object, the property remains relevant to the result of dereferencing that pointer. Therefore, it would need to be a type attribute as Richard said. I'd caution against adding attributes due to source code uglification and compiler compatibility concerns. An option is also simple; adding the attribute would be repeating history with refusing native 128-bit CAS-based atomics due to r/o issue: creating extra work for compiler writers and frustration for users, only to handle an edge case they don't care about. Alexander
