On Tuesday 23 June 2015 19:07:12 Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 June 2015 15:12:36 Mike Krus wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > while investigating crashes in QAtomicInteger on iOS, I was
> > wondering why the default is not the use the C++11 implementation if it’s
> > available? In particular, in qbasicatom
On Tuesday 23 June 2015 15:12:36 Mike Krus wrote:
> Hi
>
> while investigating crashes in QAtomicInteger on iOS, I was
> wondering why the default is not the use the C++11 implementation if it’s
> available? In particular, in qbasicatomic.h, the asm-based implementations
> are preferred for all ar
On Tuesday 23 June 2015 14:12:36 Mike Krus wrote:
> Hi
>
> while investigating crashes in QAtomicInteger on iOS, I was
> wondering why the default is not the use the C++11 implementation if it’s
> available?
Because the quality of the implementation varies a lot. They first showed up in
GCC 4.6
Hi
while investigating crashes in QAtomicInteger on iOS, I was wondering
why the default is not the use the C++11 implementation if it’s available?
In particular, in qbasicatomic.h, the asm-based implementations are preferred
for all arm platforms (and others).
Shouldn’t the version using std::a
