On Friday 26 May 2006 01:24, Loki Davison wrote:
> On 5/26/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@email-addr-hidden-job.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-05-25 at 19:57 +0300, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> > > Does someone have a good reference on this? I think the writes just
> > > are not atomic, but you can use some tricks [1] to implement atomic
> > > behaviour by spinning until the operation succeeds.
> >
> > Do we still care about 32 bit sparc?
> >
> > Lee
>
> Doing audio on a 32 bit sparc.... mmm. Why not buy a spend 150 euro
> and by a 2-3 ghz intel/amd machine new?
I think the idea was that since one (old) architecture does not have atomic
ints there might be more.
Since I really could not care less about 32bit sparc, the more interesting
question would be; is it possible that non atomic ints will crop up in future
hardware designs?
To me it just sounds, really, really, really, improbable.
0.02 SEK
/Robert
Received on Fri May 26 16:15:03 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 26 2006 - 16:15:04 EEST