-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 769
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Second sentence of 1.10p6 is redundant #159
Comments
We did have one dissenting vote from Ville for keeping the note. The other 4 opinions seemed to weakly favor dropping it. |
This is now 1.10.1 [intro.races] p4 and p13. |
jensmaurer
added a commit
to jensmaurer/draft
that referenced
this issue
Nov 12, 2016
jensmaurer
added a commit
to jensmaurer/draft
that referenced
this issue
Nov 12, 2016
zygoloid
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 12, 2016
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Please delete
"If A and B are modifications of an atomic object M and A happens before (as defined below) B, then A shall precede B in the modification order of M, which is defined below. [ Note: This states that the modification orders must respect the “happens before” relationship. —end note ]"
from 1.10p6 [intro.multithread]. The normative sentence is redundant with 1.10p15. There seems to be a concensus among SG1 commentators that it's not worth preserving the note, which seems a bit shallow. It could also be added to p15 or integrated into p19.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: