Skip to content

AtomicUint should not exist #20812

@pythonesque

Description

@pythonesque

At best, it's poorly named, because it should be AtomicUsize, but it's actually always struck me as strange that we special case usize (ne uint) like this. Besides the fact that on many architectures other types are atomic, I wouldn't be shocked to find there are some where pointer-sized words aren't (though probably not any LLVM supports, but isn't that just an implementation detail?) We should really be able to expose Atomic<T> (all our intrinsics already are), and let LLVM and other backends complain at codegen time if they can't generate the appropriate type (or have some other mechanism for determining this).

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions