Use C++11 atomics to avoid undefined behavior. #169
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
C++11 does not guarantee that loads / stores are atomic for any variable. Using C++11, we force atomicity for the log level - but do not provide any guarantee about ordering or visibility. Without this, setting and getting the log level results in undefined behavior. Undefined behavior results in illegal C++11. On any known processor and platform, this should be a no-op; however, the code is now conforming C++11.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
C++11 does not guarantee that loads / stores are atomic for any
variable. Using C++11, we force atomicity for the log level - but do not
provide any guarantee about ordering or visibility.
Without this, setting and getting the log level results in undefined
behavior. Undefined behavior results in illegal C++11.
On any known processor and platform, this should be a no-op; however, the
code is now conforming C++11.