Linus Torvalds writes: (Summary) We've done quite
well with inline asm and "volatile", and since I do not believe we
will ever get rid of either, the C++ memory model isn't much of an
improvement.
improvement.
And notice that this is very much a fundamental doubt about the whole approach that the standards language is taking. Honestly, if the C++ standards body had taken a completely different approach of actually *definining* a virtual machine, and defining the actual code generation (ie the language would actually *define* what every operation did in the virtual machine), and defining what the memory ordering within that virtual machine was, I would give it a chance in hell of working.
chance in hell of working.
But that's not what the C++ standards body did.
improvement.
And notice that this is very much a fundamental doubt about the whole approach that the standards language is taking. Honestly, if the C++ standards body had taken a completely different approach of actually *definining* a virtual machine, and defining the actual code generation (ie the language would actually *define* what every operation did in the virtual machine), and defining what the memory ordering within that virtual machine was, I would give it a chance in hell of working.
chance in hell of working.
But that's not what the C++ standards body did.