Re: Atomicity block

eventhelix@hotmail.com (EventHelix.com)
4 Feb 2004 21:44:45 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Atomicity block alexili@ms.kyrnet.kg (2004-02-01)
Re: Atomicity block lcargill@worldnet.att.net (Les Cargill) (2004-02-04)
Re: Atomicity block thad@ionsky.com (Thad Smith) (2004-02-04)
Re: Atomicity block tlh20@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-02-04)
Re: Atomicity block eventhelix@hotmail.com (2004-02-04)
Re: Atomicity block nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-02-08)
Re: Atomicity block K.Hagan@thermoteknix.co.uk (Ken Hagan) (2004-02-12)
Re: Atomicity block lcargill@worldnet.att.net (Les Cargill) (2004-02-13)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: eventhelix@hotmail.com (EventHelix.com)
Newsgroups: comp.distributed,comp.programming,comp.compilers
Date: 4 Feb 2004 21:44:45 -0500
Organization: http://groups.google.com
References: 04-02-022
Keywords: parallel
Posted-Date: 04 Feb 2004 21:44:45 EST

I don't think any language supports primitives for atomicity. The
support for atomicity varies greatly amongst processors, so it seems
unlikely that a language primitive could address this.


Sandeep
--
http://www.EventHelix.com/EventStudio

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.