Re: [9fans] NUMA

["Joel C. Salomon" <joelcsalomon@gmail.com>]

On 07/17/2011 03:01 AM, tlaronde@polynum.com wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:39:50PM -0400, Joel C. Salomon wrote:
>> On 07/16/2011 04:02 AM, tlaronde@polynum.com wrote:
>>>                I wonder what minimum set of keywords could be added,
>>> say, to C, so that the situation can be greatly improved without the
>>> burden being greatly increased. [non-predicative routines being, from
>>> a parallel point of view, atomic]
>>
>> Have a look at what the C1x standard is proposing wrt atomics.
>
> Thanks for the tip!
>
> BTW, if I understand correctly the purpose of the next C standard, I
> guess there is no urge for kencc to support C99
> since it is already a transitory only partially supported standard.

The only place in which that's relevant is that C1x creates language
subsets and some of the new language features are optional.  (I.e., if
your compiler doesn't implement feature x, predefine this macro X and
you can still call your compiler conforming.)  The only C99 feature
listed as optional is VLAs.

BTW, C1x standardizes part of kencc's nested-anonymous-struct feature.

--Joel