Re: [boost] Re: Usefulness of weak_ptr

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-12 14:42:51

From: "bill_kempf" <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
> --- In boost_at_y..., "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_m...> wrote:
> > In particular, ::InterlockedXXX (Win32) and atomic_* (linux) are
> documented
> > to be memory barriers... if you can call that documentation but
> that's
> > another story.
>
> Huh?  Win32 has no need for memory barriers and I'm unaware of any
> documentation indicating the Interlocked* methods are memory barriers.

Win32 runs on Alpha. IA-64 is not that permissive, too, although I did say
Win32, granted. :-)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dllproc/synchro_11df.asp

As I said, if you can call that documentation. Linux is no better. Although
the intent is pretty clear.