[libcxx-commits] [libcxx] [libc++] P0718R2: Implementation of std::atomic<shared_ptr<T>> and std::atomic<weak_ptr<T>> (PR #194215)

[Hristo Hristov via libcxx-commits]

Zingam wrote:

> > I would rather comment only on general libc++ practices and leave the implementation details to the expert.
> 
> Okay, thank you very much for all the suggestions, how I can track the documentation changes as you, for example, I wouldn't even think about updating any .rst or .csv (or any docs) files, so, need I just to keep them in mind?

You need to keep that in mind :)))) I guess! I have a few in-progress PRs that have been through several releases. After a release is branched, new release notes file is added, I synch the branch with main and make the appropriate adjustments. Quite often there a few more changes to be made than just release notes, docs, etc. BTW. Not synching a branch with main often enough might make it very hard to update if left untouched in a long time.

> 
> > I expect that we merge this patch first and then the other one, which was once merge and then reverted on request: #194544
> 
> Sounds good, but I'm working on benchmarks request from RFC from MindSpectre: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-implementing-std-atomic-shared-ptr-t-and-std-atomic-weak-ptr-t-p0718r2-for-libc/91586 And it seems that I can improve the solution and provide visual compare results of LB (lock-based) and LF (lock-free) solutions.

IMO. If this is a complete implementation of P0718 (which is going to be merged), regardless of planned future improvements, we should add a release note entry.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/194215