On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 05:03:53PM +0200, Honza Bambas wrote:
> On 4/2/2014 11:33 AM, Nicolas B. Pierron wrote:
> >
> >--lock(mRefCnt);
> >if (lock(mRefCnt) == 0) {
> > delete this;
> >}
> >
> >This way, this is more obvious that we might not be doing the right
> >things, as long as we are careful to refuse AtomicHandler references in
> >reviews.
> >
>
> I personally don't think this will save us. This can easily slip through
> review as well.
>
> Also, I'm using our mozilla::Atomic<> for not just refcounting but as an
> easy lock-less t-s counters. If I had to change the code from mMyCounter +=
> something; to mozilla::Unused << AtomicFetchAndAdd(&mMyCounter, something);
> I would not be happy :)
>
> According the refcnt code (or any code that may be concerned) better is to
> treat is as "always thread safe" if not an overkill of course... Same as
> you wear condoms with strangers, right?so are you offering to audit all of the existing code that might be used with Atomic<T> to make sure it is threadsafe? Trev > > -hb- > > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
