Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #71276

Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free()

From Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free()
Date 2020-01-10 22:48 -0800
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <86lfqe32uv.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink)
References (16 earlier) <669f64c5-28fc-427a-9151-57e6c2e08b27@googlegroups.com> <qqrmmd$fsj$1@news.albasani.net> <27be0974-6f5d-481a-a847-8956bb5c8780@googlegroups.com> <868snza7vj.fsf@linuxsc.com> <858925b7-12ba-4b1f-bb6a-1452c472ea8b@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Tiib writes:

> On Friday, 29 November 2019 01:39:26 UTC+2, Tim Rentsch  wrote:
>
>>  <<D6 F6 [05b6]>>  Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes:
>>
>>> On Sunday, 17 November 2019 16:49:59 UTC+2, Bonita Montero  wrote:
>>>
>>>> The standard says that all objects of complete types have a poper
>>>> alignment.
>>>
>>> That is bald, groundless and nonsensical assertion.
>>> All objects *must* have complete types in C++ program:
>>> "A program is ill-formed if the definition of any object gives
>>> the object an incomplete type."
>>
>> Not counting the misspelling of proper, there is nothing nonsensical
>> about it.  Furthermore although the C++ standard doesn't use those
>> exact words, it does imply that the statement is true.
>
> Nonsensical is to assert that standard says something specially about
> properties of objects of complete types when these are the only kind
> of objects that may exist in well-formed program.

I think you misunderstand the English word nonsensical.  A
statement can be unlikely, silly, or ridiculous, but none
of those make it nonsensical.  In fact to say a statement
is unlikely more or less automatically implies it is sensical.

> If you mean (leaving the nonsense aside) that "all objects must have
> proper alignment" is said by standard in some other wording then feel
> free to quote, I have found it not.

I mean I find the statement consistent with what the standard
does say.

>> Incidentally, I think the word "bald" doesn't mean what you think it
>> means.  The statement "the sun is shining today" could accurately,
>> even if perhaps confusingly, be termed a "bald statement".
>
> I used "bald assertion" in sense of "a statement used without proof
> or evidence of truth".  Wikipedia claims it is used in that sense
> about marketing statements ... [...]

Despite what Wikipedia may say, that's isn't what the word means.
I recommend, especially for people for whom English is not their
first language, consulting a dictionary (or better, more than one)
whenever there is any question about what a word means or whether
a particular word is a good choice in a particular situation.  I
routinely consult dictionaries when questions like this come up
(yes, even though English is my first language).

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-28 15:39 -0800
  Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-11-28 16:33 -0800
    Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-01-10 22:48 -0800
      Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-01-11 00:24 -0800
        Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-01-14 07:16 -0800
          Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-01-14 08:55 -0800
            Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-01-21 02:01 -0800
              Re: std::atomic<T>::is_lock_free() James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-21 06:00 -0800

csiph-web