Subject: [SG10] Jacksonville additions: non-controversial?
From: Nelson, Clark (clark.nelson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-11 12:59:17
Several of my proposals have attracted no comments so far:
searcher design mistake no macro
I also want to specifically call attention to the hardware interference
(cache-line) size proposal. The paper proposed:
But "thread" is not in the name proposed for the library, so it
shouldn't be in the name of the macro either. (Apparently that was left
over from the original proposal, in which this was provided by the
thread class.) I think shortening that name is the obviously correct
thing to do.
Finally, I proposed making the new headers from the parallelism TS
consistent with those from the fundamentals TS by adding macros (with
specific values) defined within those headers:
If there is still no comment about any of these after this message,
I will assume there is consensus support for all these proposals.
SG10 list run by firstname.lastname@example.org