From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27179 invoked by alias); 12 May 2016 05:49:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jit-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: jit-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26741 invoked by uid 89); 12 May 2016 05:49:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.99.1 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=UD:cppreference.com, sk:encppr, en.cppreference.com, UD:en.cppreference.com X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: ovh.starynkevitch.net Authentication-Results: ovh.starynkevitch.net (amavisd-new); dkim=pass reason="pass (just generated, assumed good)" header.d=starynkevitch.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d= starynkevitch.net; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :content-type:mime-version:user-agent:date:date:message-id :subject:subject:from:from:to; s=dkim; t=1463032122; x= 1463896123; bh=ktQGtEcMocEdcvKDPuUTzTNT3N0fBVKZA090BNA2uTg=; b=R V6qGRjangIL6XesWzWPz7qcoYRPHzCK2XuysqeLwMyQPt2NdjuT0Cxn2HobJ5Bsg TFASC21DjIiIjwZg4LnF2NdQiQydrMGInlUBZoS4c0CR/40TuMLdAT6aGBzIiXa0 6F3XuFC+W+h1ufd2htVbzoEWxmITiDy3TCFofSDShE= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at ovh.starynkevitch.net To: jit@gcc.gnu.org From: Basile Starynkevitch Subject: wish: gcc_jit_type_get_atomic Message-ID: <5734193A.2040903@starynkevitch.net> Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 00:00:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-q2/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 Hello all, GCC JIT has gcc_jit_type_get_volatile to support the volatile qualifier. But shouldn't it also have a gcc_jit_type_get_atomic to support the C11 _Atomic qualifier? http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/atomic Cheers. -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basilestarynkevitchnet mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mine, sont seulement les miennes} ***