[LLVMdev] Proposal for a new LLVM concurrency memory model

[Owen Anderson]

On Apr 26, 2010, at 11:28 AM, David Greene wrote:

> On Sunday 25 April 2010 21:26:47 Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Chandler, Owen, and I have written up a proposal for a new memory
>> model and atomic intrinsics in LLVM, which will make it possible to
>> support Java and the upcoming C++0x standard. The proposed changes to
>> the LangRef are at
>> <http://docs.google.com/View?docID=ddb4mhxz_22dz5g98dd&revision=_latest>,
> 
> I just started reading this.  Should I interpret "may not" as "must not"
> throughout this document?
> 
> The language of this proposal needs to be much clearer.  "may not" can
> be interpreted in at least two different, opposite ways.

The "must not" reading is correct.  I've changed the document to reflect that.  Thanks for pointing it out.

--Owen