Atomic floats on x86_64

[Andrew Haley]

On 09/11/14 18:56, NightStrike wrote:
> Is it a bug that I can atomically store a float using __atomic_store,
> but not __atomic_store_n?  I'd really like to be able to do it without
> the extra layer of indirection and the extra requirement of a temp
> variable that I don't need.

I don't get this.  Can you explain a bit more, or provide a test case?
There shouldn't be any loss of performance.

Andrew.