[concurrency-interest] RFR: 8065804: JEP 171: Clarifications/corrections for fence intrinsics

Martin Buchholz martinrb at google.com
Mon Dec 1 15:13:24 EST 2014


On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Aleksey Shipilev
<aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com> wrote:
> I think "implies the effect of C++11" is too strong wording. "related"
> might be more appropriate.

I've been struggling to come up with better wording.  The latest webrev says

+     * Corresponds to C11 atomic_thread_fence(memory_order_acquire).

but I'm not totally happy with that either. "Essentially equivalent to" ?


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list