This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of C++17 status.
Section: 33.5.8 [atomics.types.generic] Status: C++17 Submitter: Stephan T. Lavavej Opened: 2014-10-01 Last modified: 2017-07-30
Priority: 0
View all other issues in [atomics.types.generic].
View all issues with C++17 status.
Discussion:
<atomic>
doesn't provide counterparts for <inttypes.h>
's most useful typedefs, possibly
because they're quasi-optional. We can easily fix this.
[2014-11, Urbana]
Typedefs were transitional compatibility hack. Should use _Atomic
macro or template.
E.g. _Atomic(int8_t)
. BUT _Atomic
disappeared!
Detlef will look for _Atomic
macro. If missing, will open issue.
[2014-11-25, Hans comments]
There is no _Atomic
in C++. This is related to the much more general unanswered question of whether C++17
should reference C11, C99, or neither.
[2015-02 Cologne]
AM: I think this is still an SG1 issue; they need to deal with it before we do.
[2015-05 Lenexa, SG1 response]
Move to SG1-OK status. This seems like an easy short-term fix. We probably need a paper on C/C++ atomics compatibility
to deal with _Atomic
, but that's a separable issue.
[2015-10 pre-Kona]
SG1 hands this over to LWG for wording review
Proposed resolution:
This wording is relative to N3936.
Change 33.5.8 [atomics.types.generic] p8 as depicted:
-8- There shall be atomic typedefs corresponding to the typedefs in the header
<inttypes.h>
as specified in Table 147.atomic_intN_t
,atomic_uintN_t
,atomic_intptr_t
, andatomic_uintptr_t
shall be defined if and only ifintN_t
,uintN_t
,intptr_t
, anduintptr_t
are defined, respectively.
Change 99 [atomics.types.operations.req], Table 147 ("atomic
<inttypes.h>
typedefs"), as depicted:
Table 147 — atomic
<inttypes.h>
typedefsAtomic typedef <inttypes.h>
typeatomic_int8_t
int8_t
atomic_uint8_t
uint8_t
atomic_int16_t
int16_t
atomic_uint16_t
uint16_t
atomic_int32_t
int32_t
atomic_uint32_t
uint32_t
atomic_int64_t
int64_t
atomic_uint64_t
uint64_t
…