Sujet : Re: Memory ordering
De : aph (at) *nospam* littlepinkcloud.invalid
Groupes : comp.archDate : 18. Nov 2024, 13:03:55
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <17qdnZAZFKC2sKb6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@supernews.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User-Agent : tin/1.9.2-20070201 ("Dalaruan") (UNIX) (Linux/4.18.0-553.5.1.el8_10.x86_64 (x86_64))
Anton Ertl <
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid writes:
Yes. That Alpha behaviour was a historic error. No one wants to do
that again.
Was it an actual behaviour of any Alpha for public sale, or was it
just the Alpha specification?
I don't know. Given the contortions that the Linux kernel people had
to go through, maybe it really was present in hardware.
As a programming language implementer, I don't much think about "Will
the hardware really do this?" because new hardware arises all the
time, and I don't want users' programs to stop working.
Andrew.