This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of Resolved status.
Section: 32.5 [atomics] Status: Resolved Submitter: Lawrence Crowl Opened: 2008-08-24 Last modified: 2016-01-28
Priority: Not Prioritized
View all other issues in [atomics].
View all issues with Resolved status.
Duplicate of: 942
Discussion:
The atomic_exchange and atomic_exchange_explicit functions seem to
be inconsistently missing parameters.
[ Post Summit: ]
Lawrence: Need to write up a list for Pete with details.
Detlef: Should not be New, we already talked about in Concurrency group.
Recommend Open.
[ 2009-07 Frankfurt ]
Lawrence will handle all issues relating to atomics in a single paper.
LWG will defer discussion on atomics until that paper appears.
Move to Open.
[ 2009-08-17 Handled by N2925. ]
[ 2009-10 Santa Cruz: ]
NAD EditorialResolved. Solved by N2992.
Proposed resolution:
Add the appropriate parameters. For example,
bool atomic_exchange(volatile atomic_bool*, bool); bool atomic_exchange_explicit(volatile atomic_bool*, bool, memory_order);