On Monday, November 22, 2010 12:34:04 pm Richard Sandiford wrote:
> For the record, the thing I half-remembered on the call was:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg00697.html
> and:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg02112.html
>
> The problem is that all __sync
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> For the record, the thing I half-remembered on the call was:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg00697.html
> and:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg02112.html
>
> The problem is that all __sync operations
For the record, the thing I half-remembered on the call was:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg00697.html
and:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg02112.html
The problem is that all __sync operations besides __sync_lock_test_and_set
and __sync_lock_release are defined