Remove notes about shared memory from the lock free recommendation#8242
Open
huixie90 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Remove notes about shared memory from the lock free recommendation#8242huixie90 wants to merge 1 commit into
huixie90 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Contributor
|
CC @ogiroux. |
Member
Contributor
|
Since many of SG1's load-bearing specifications seems to come in the form of notes, I think it might be prudent to ask SG1 to file a core issue for this to record this justification. |
tkoeppe
added
the
not-editorial
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Following long discussion in SG1 about P3255R1
https://lists.isocpp.org/parallel/2025/09/4624.php
We agreed that the notes about "shared memory" is vague and cannot be relied on. The standard does not mention anywhere about two processes with shared memory. This note will have conflicts with the meaning of lock free that is proposed in P3255R1. Since this note is not useful, let's remove it editorially.
Can Olivier Giroux verify the change?