Something needs to happen with shared, and soon.

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 11/15/12 2:18 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 November 2012 at 16:43:14 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> On Nov 15, 2012, at 5:16 AM, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> What is the point of ensuring that the compiler does not reorder
>>> load/stores if the CPU is allowed to do so ?
>>
>> Because we can write ASM to tell the CPU not to. We don't have any
>> such ability for the compiler right now.
>
> I think the question was: Why would you want to disable compiler code
> motion for loads/stores which are not atomic, as the CPU might ruin your
> assumptions anyway?

The compiler does whatever it takes to ensure sequential consistency for 
shared use, including possibly inserting fences in certain places.

Andrei