From: Peter Harris <git@peter.is-a-geek.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 13:43:30 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] MSVC: Windows-native implementation for subset of Pthreads API
Message-ID: <eaa105841001140543q777c868bu27eee5e492192ec4@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100114051241.GF10586@dpotapov.dyndns.org>

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Dmitry Potapov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 07:40:43PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>> Is there "InterlockedRead()"? I suppose no, but I would get confirmation that
>> a simple memory mov instruction is atomic WRT Interlocked* functions.
>
> If I were writing Interlocked API, I would certainly add InterlockedRead()
> and InterlockedWrite() functions, but somehow Microsoft decided that these
> functions are redundant.

InterlockedWrite is spelt InterlockedExchange.

> Finally, there is a paranoiac implementation of InterlockedRead(&foo):
>
>   result = InterlockedAdd(&foo, 0)
>
> but, IMHO, it is pathetic...

Agreed. Another pathetic implementation:
  result = InterlockedCompareExchange(&foo, 0, 0);

Peter Harris