On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 06:16:49PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > On 08.05.2020 21:33, m...@netbsd.org wrote: > > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 04:09:02PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > >> I object to opinions that libatomic is generally broken, if that would > >> be the cause, it wouldn't be available and used on relatively all > >> relevant generic purpose Operating Systems. Personally, I already > >> received last year a feedback from one 3rd party project from Microsoft > >> that they prefer to drop NetBSD support (out of Windows, Linux, MacOS, > >> BSDs) rather than allow non-libatomic usage. > > > > You need to stop being ambiguous about the rationale, it's not helping > > your arguments sound strong. Name the project and link to the > > discussion. > > > > > NetBSD support #77 > https://github.com/microsoft/snmalloc/pull/77#issuecomment-517375185
I find it funny that you pick an example where correctly working atomic implementation is essential and where the only reason it is pulled in is a bug in GCC. Joerg
