Re: Should atomic_xxx() functions reject not-_Atomic() arguments ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 7:20 AM Chris Hall <gcc@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Now, the Standard also tells us that _Atomic(uint64_t) and uint64_t may
> have different sizes, representations and alignment.  So I guess:
>     bar = atomic_fetch_add(&bar, 1) ;
> should be an error ?

__atomic_fetch_add accepts any integer or pointer type.  So the fact
that _Atomic(uint64_t) and uint64_t may be different types is not a
problem, as long as they are still integer types.  This works like an
overloaded function in C++.

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-9.2.0/gcc/_005f_005fatomic-Builtins.html#g_t_005f_005fatomic-Builtins

Jim



[Index of Archives]     [Linux C Programming]     [Linux Kernel]     [eCos]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Announce]     [Autoconf]     [The DWARVES Debugging Tools]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux GCC]

  Powered by Linux