Subject: Re: [boost] [Atomic] Rationale for preventingcopyconstruction/assignment?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-31 04:49:37
Rob Stewart wrote:
On May 30, 2013, at 5:34 AM, "Peter Dimov" <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > I don't think that the copy can be wrong, although I may be missing
> > something. From a cursory inspection, it seems to me that
> > a1 = a2;
> > and
> > r1 = a2;
> > a1 = r1;
> > are equivalent. It's true that in the second case a2's value can change
> > after the first line, but it can change in the first case after the only
> > line as well (which corresponds to changing after the second line in the
> > second case), and the observable effect is the same (except in the
> > trivial case in which a1 and a2 are the same variable, but that's easily
> > taken care of).
> While what you say is true, the two are different from a sequential
> consistency POV.
I don't think so.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk