On Mon, 8 Sep 2025 16:22:52 +0200
Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 3:19 PM Dan Horák wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > with the rebase of libatomic_ops to the latest upstream release 7.8.4 I
> > went through the consumers of this library and reviewed the need for
> > libatomic_ops there.
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 3:19 PM Dan Horák wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> with the rebase of libatomic_ops to the latest upstream release 7.8.4 I
> went through the consumers of this library and reviewed the need for
> libatomic_ops there. Upstream discourages the use of libatomic_ops in
> new(er) projects, bec
Hi,
with the rebase of libatomic_ops to the latest upstream release 7.8.4 I
went through the consumers of this library and reviewed the need for
libatomic_ops there. Upstream discourages the use of libatomic_ops in
new(er) projects, because better alternatives exist in form of C11 or C+
+14 standa
