[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: PATCH libatomic
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 06:16:49PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 08.05.2020 21:33, maya%NetBSD.org@localhost wrote:
> > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 04:09:02PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >> I object to opinions that libatomic is generally broken, if that would
> >> be the cause, it wouldn't be available and used on relatively all
> >> relevant generic purpose Operating Systems. Personally, I already
> >> received last year a feedback from one 3rd party project from Microsoft
> >> that they prefer to drop NetBSD support (out of Windows, Linux, MacOS,
> >> BSDs) rather than allow non-libatomic usage.
> > You need to stop being ambiguous about the rationale, it's not helping
> > your arguments sound strong. Name the project and link to the
> > discussion.
> NetBSD support #77
I find it funny that you pick an example where correctly working
atomic implementation is essential and where the only reason it is
pulled in is a bug in GCC.
Main Index |
Thread Index |