• Steven Schveighoffer (22/30) May 22 2013 rt
• Manu (7/36) May 22 2013 At least the code looks complete.

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:

On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:58:34 -0400, Dmitry Olshansky  =

<dmitry.olsh gmail.com> wrote:

 07-May-2013 17:25, Andrei Alexandrescu =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:=


 No. A tutorial on memory consistency models would be too long to inse=


rt
 here. I don't know of a good online resource, does anyone?

 Sutter's Mill is a good starting point even though it's C++ biased.

 Two recent insightful talks on C++11 memory model with down and dirty =

 =

 details:

 http://herbsutter.com/2013/02/11/atomic-weapons-the-c-memory-model-and=

-modern-hardware/

I finally got around to watching this.  Absolutely mind-blowing, and a  =

very very good talk.  This is what I would point people at, although it =
is  =

a bit long (and necessarily so).  Didn't seem like it took 3 hours :)

I take back all my arguments regarding the previous discussion, they wer=
e  =

all wrong, along with my concept of the "issues" with out-of-order  =

reads/writes.  I really like how Herb explains that it doesn't really  =

matter where the re-ordering happens, to the coder, it's all the same (a=
s  =

if the source code is reordered), and how you can't ever really reason  =

about code if it has races.

Is D prepared to do (or does it do?) the same things that C/C++11 does  =

with atomics?  It seems it is a necessity.  The docs on core.atomic are,=
  =

well, actually missing: http://dlang.org/phobos/core_atomic.html

-Steve

Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:

At least the code looks complete.
It's a shame it uses inline asm though. Would be much nicer to implement
via intrinsics.


On 23 May 2013 10:17, Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> wrote:

 On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:58:34 -0400, Dmitry Olshansky <
 dmitry.olsh gmail.com> wrote:

  07-May-2013 17:25, Andrei Alexandrescu =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:

  No. A tutorial on memory consistency models would be too long to insert
 here. I don't know of a good online resource, does anyone?

 Sutter's Mill is a good starting point even though it's C++ biased.

 Two recent insightful talks on C++11 memory model with down and dirty
 details:

 http://herbsutter.com/2013/02/**11/atomic-weapons-the-c-**
 memory-model-and-modern-**hardware/<http://herbsutter.com/2013/02/11/ato=


mic-weapons-the-c-memory-model-and-modern-hardware/>

 I finally got around to watching this.  Absolutely mind-blowing, and a
 very very good talk.  This is what I would point people at, although it i=

s
 a bit long (and necessarily so).  Didn't seem like it took 3 hours :)

 I take back all my arguments regarding the previous discussion, they were
 all wrong, along with my concept of the "issues" with out-of-order
 reads/writes.  I really like how Herb explains that it doesn't really
 matter where the re-ordering happens, to the coder, it's all the same (as
 if the source code is reordered), and how you can't ever really reason
 about code if it has races.

 Is D prepared to do (or does it do?) the same things that C/C++11 does
 with atomics?  It seems it is a necessity.  The docs on core.atomic are,
 well, actually missing: http://dlang.org/phobos/core_**atomic.html<http:/=

/dlang.org/phobos/core_atomic.html>
 -Steve