Created on 2012-03-08.00:00:00 last changed 130 months ago
[ This wording is relative to N3376. ]
void atomic_flag_clear(volatile atomic_flag *object) noexcept; void atomic_flag_clear(atomic_flag *object) noexcept; void atomic_flag_clear_explicit(volatile atomic_flag *object, memory_order order) noexcept; void atomic_flag_clear_explicit(atomic_flag *object, memory_order order) noexcept; void atomic_flag::clear(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile noexcept; void atomic_flag::clear(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) noexcept;-7- Requires: The order argument shall not be memory_order_consume, memory_order_acquire, or memory_order_acq_rel.
-8- Effects: Atomically sets the value pointed to by object or by this to false. Memory is affected according to the value of order.
[ 2013-04-20, Bristol ]
Accepted for the working paper
[ 2012, Portland: move to Review ]
Hans: this is a clear oversight.
Moved to review
N3376 [atomics.flag]/7 says this about atomic_flag::clear:
Requires: The order argument shall not be memory_order_acquire or memory_order_acq_rel.
In addition, memory_order_consume should be disallowed, since it doesn't meaningfully apply to store operations. It's already disallowed on the analogous atomic<T>::store. The proposed updated text would be:
Requires: The order argument shall not be memory_order_consume, memory_order_acquire, or memory_order_acq_rel.
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2014-02-20 13:20:35 | admin | set | status: wp -> c++14 |
2013-04-25 19:07:07 | admin | set | status: voting -> wp |
2013-04-20 08:17:49 | admin | set | status: review -> voting |
2013-04-18 22:58:13 | admin | set | messages: + msg6452 |
2012-11-02 22:48:46 | admin | set | messages: + msg6249 |
2012-11-02 22:48:46 | admin | set | status: new -> review |
2012-03-12 20:49:57 | admin | set | messages: + msg6057 |
2012-03-08 00:00:00 | admin | create |