Am 11.06.25 um 17:20 schrieb Andrey Semashev via Boost:
On 11 Jun 2025 17:47, Ivan Matek wrote:
I agree with your concern about readability, but would strong typedef work here? I am not an atomic expert, but it seems wrapping uint32_t in a simple struct does not destroy lockfree property of atomic.
https://godbolt.org/z/WfGx76vxo <https://godbolt.org/z/WfGx76vxo> It would work, but it also would not enable bitwise operations on the atomic. And regarding integers, we already have a strong typedef in the language, it is called enums. :)
I fully agree with Andrey here: https://godbolt.org/z/4c5E53czz Compares the 2 approaches and I very much like the enum approach which does not pollute the global scope with constants that should be scoped too but isn't possibly with the strong type. See:
auto configuration = kUseSimd | kUsePrefetching;
auto config = ConfigEnum::UseSimd | ConfigEnum::UsePrefetching;
I'm using the 2nd approach in a couple of projects, usually with a macro or trait to enable the bitwise operators. As for atomic enums: I wouldn't expect too much there as e.g. `config |= ConfigEnum::UseSimd` wouldn't be reliable for atomics without a compare&swap. You noted that already for "user-defined bitwise operators defined for an enum,", so I guess you are aware of that already.