This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++0x] contiguous bitfields race implementation
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/27/2011 01:08 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway, I don't think a --param is appropriate to control a flag whether
>>> to allow store data-races to be created. ?Why not use a regular option
>>> instead?
>>
>> I don't care either way. ?What -foption-name do you suggest?
>
> Well, I suggested a -f option set last year when this was laid out, and Ian
> suggested that it should be a --param
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-05/msg00118.html
>
> "I don't agree with your proposed command line options. ?They seem fine
> for internal use, but I think very very few users would know when or
> whether they should use -fno-data-race-stores. ?I think you should
> downgrade those options to a --param value, and think about a
> multi-layered -fmemory-model option. "
Hm, ok. I suppose we can revisit this when implementing such -fmemory-model
option then. --params we can at least freely remove between releases.
Richard.
> Andrew
>