Synced to Apple’s issue tracker as rdar://143438616

I wonder if replacing it with a ManagedAtomic<Type> would be more than enough or does it have to be UnsafeAtomic?

I meant ManagedAtomic by the atomic types in the standard library.

Perfect! I can take a look at this by the end of this week

Do we want to always import swift-atomics in each and every framework? or should we write a wrapper around it?

example:

struct Atomic<T> {
  let lock: ManagedAtomic<T>

var value: T? {
  get { lock.load(ordering: ....)  }
  set { lock.store(newValue, ordering: ....) }
}

The code above will replace somthing like this:

let lock = ManagedAtomic(false)
/// some code
lock.store(v, ordering: ...)
/// more code
if lock.load(ordering: ....) {

}

I was thinking to use the Atomic type that’s available in the standard library: https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals/0410-atomics.md

Oh I didn't know that existed within the Synchronization framework.

At the same time wouldn't that only work on swift 6 and above? Is deprecating swift 5.10 support in the libraries roadmap?

https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/blob/c14561fba3c057a247f5bcaa514536cd0d22102b/stdlib/public/Synchronization/Atomics/Atomic.swift#L20

(And it seems that that Atomics is based on macOS 15, not sure yet. Still trying to figure out why Xcode is misbehaving)

Yes, we can raise the deployment target to macOS 15 on main, so we can use Synchronization.