On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, NightStrike wrote:
So it seems that boehm-gc is in the exact state as libffi.
This is yet another example of why we shouldn't duplicate sources...
Hans, would you be willing to bring boehm-gc up to speed so that we
can start getting it to work for Win64? Without this,
The generated code here is correct in both cases. In the RISC--V case, I
believe it is conservative, at a minimum, in that atomics should not imply
IO ordering. We had an earlier discussion, which seemed to have consensus
in favor of that opinion. I believe clang does not enforce IO ordering.
You
On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 2:11 PM Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> On 10/13/22 13:54, Hans Boehm wrote:
>
> The generated code here is correct in both cases. In the RISC--V case, I
> believe it is conservative, at a minimum, in that atomics should not imply
> IO orderi
