[concurrency-interest] Atomic assignment

Joe Bowbeer joe.bowbeer at gmail.com
Fri May 8 04:32:07 EDT 2009

On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Mark Thornton wrote:

> By all accesses I presume you mean including things like ++, which is
> reasonably well documented as not atomic.
> 4247780 doesn't appear to exist in the bug database.
Bug report 4526490 and related indicate that volatile long and double were
fixed in 2001.


++ is two long accesses.  Atomic applies to each long access separately, not
to the pair of accesses.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20090508/5c102038/attachment.html>

More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list