[libcxx-dev] What C++03 support should <atomic> have?

Olivier Giroux via libcxx-dev libcxx-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Feb 5 21:33:48 PST 2019

Sorry, that quote is from my patch, but there’s identical code elsewhere in the file. I swear!


From: libcxx-dev <libcxx-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Olivier Giroux via libcxx-dev <libcxx-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Reply-To: Olivier Giroux <OGiroux at nvidia.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 9:33 PM
To: "libcxx-dev at lists.llvm.org" <libcxx-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: [libcxx-dev] What C++03 support should <atomic> have?

There is a little bit of code in this file that suggests it once worked in C++03.

Like so:
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
    __cxx_atomic_type() _NOEXCEPT = default;
    __cxx_atomic_type() _NOEXCEPT : __a_value() {}
#endif // _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG

Is that an actual design goal? It looks like it’s broken right now.

Do we maintain this, or do we bump the assumed default to C++11?

Thanks for your guidance,


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/libcxx-dev/attachments/20190206/a451956b/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the libcxx-dev mailing list