[Bug middle-end/59448] Code generation doesn't respect C11 address-dependency

torvald at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Thu Oct 30 21:08:00 GMT 2014


--- Comment #21 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to torvald from comment #17)
> (In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #15)
> > So have we concluded that we should promote memory_order_consume to
> > memory_order_acquire for now?  
> I also think that this is the best way forward.  I believe everyone in ISO
> C++ SG1 agreed that this is basically a defect in the standard.

To clarify, my impression from the discussion was that there was general
consensus that memory_order_consume as specified now wouldn't achieve what it
was intended to in practice, due to the implementation issues.  IOW, it's not
useful even though it's not a defect in the sense of being inconsistent or
plain wrong.

More information about the Gcc-bugs mailing list