atomic operations compared to c++

[rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d]

On 14/06/2017 11:40 AM, gzp wrote:
> After digging into it the source for me it seems as D is lacking a 
> "standardized" atomic library. It has some basic concepts, but far 
> behind the c++ standards.
> I don't know if there are any RFC-s in this topic but it requires a lot 
> of work. Just to mention some by my first experience:
> 
> cas
> in all api I've seen on a failed swap, the current value is retrieved
> (in c/c++ there are intrinsic for them)
> 
> exchange
> no api for it and not implementable without spinning
> (in c/c++ there are intrinsic for them)
> 
> atomicFence
> No memory ordering is considered in the API
> Even tough it falls back to the strongest/slowest one for the current 
> implementation it should be part of the API.
> 
> If D wants be be a real system programming language (ex a replacement 
> for c++) please address these issues. I'm not an expert on the subject, 
> but D seems to be in a c++11 stage where compiler/memory barriers and 
> atomic had to be implemented differently for each platform and the 
> programmer could only hope that compiler won't f*ck up everything during 
> optimization.
> 
> I don't know if D compiler is aware of the fences and won't move out/in 
> instructions from guarded areas.
> 
> Thanks: gzp

Please create an issue here: issues.dlang.org for druntime atomic support.
Clearly the requirements that we have been working under are not up to 
your expectations (or needs).