Review Request: Add spinlocks lock type, based on GCC intrisincs

[Thiago Macieira]

On segunda-feira, 27 de agosto de 2012 18.20.15, Michael Pyne wrote:
> > Please use the Qt atomic types. Until GCC 4.7, they generate better code.
> 
> I agree, the reason it wasn't that way initially is mentioned in the 
> discussion on the bug (but basically because you can't simply put 
> QBasicAtomicInt in the union used to store the different lock types that
> are  possible).

Why not?

QBasicAtomicInt are permitted in unions. Besides, why do you want it in a 
union in the first place? You should not access the data that it holds *except* 
via the QBasicAtomicInt functions.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20120828/4e75635d/attachment.sig>