On 6 November 2011 15:40, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > I think a better example is atomics support in C++11 and C11, where > std::atomic<int> aka std::atomic_int can be exactly the same > representation as _Atomic int and are compatible, but the C++ library > solution also allows std::atomic<FooBar> which C doesn't. A *lot* of > work went into ensuring the C++ atomics support included a subset that > would be implementable in C. > > Why couldn't the same be done for _Fract?
My point here, in case it wasn't clear, is that a C++ compiler doesn't need to support _Atomic as a specifier, but code can be written to work with both C and C++ anyway.
