Skip to content
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

[atomics.types.operations] Avoid inappropriate use of 'underlying type' #2061

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 28, 2018

Conversation

jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Fixes #2057.

@jfbastien
Copy link
Contributor

I was worried by #2057 that some in SG1 may have Opinions on this wording, despite it being in a note, but this suggested update seems totally fine and I don't think SG1 would care. LGTM!

@tkoeppe tkoeppe added the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Jun 27, 2018
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Jun 27, 2018
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

Rebased.

@zygoloid
Copy link
Member

Given the recent changes to compare-and-swap semantics, would it now be more useful to say "value representation" instead of "object representation"? (The memcpy / memcmp semantics only apply when the value representation and object representation are the same, but it may be more obvious if we reinforce that here.)

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

@zygoloid, agreed. Fixed.

@zygoloid zygoloid merged commit 6f6a5dd into cplusplus:master Jun 28, 2018
@jensmaurer jensmaurer deleted the b3 branch June 28, 2018 21:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants