Atomic::cmpxchg_ptr code duplication

[Xiaobin Lu]

On Mac OS X, I believe intptr_t is typedefed as "int" on both 32 & 64 
bit. So, sizeof(intptr_t) on 64 bit Mac OS is still 4 and size(void*) is 8.

-Xiaobin
John Coomes wrote:
> Paul Hohensee (Paul.Hohensee at Sun.COM) wrote:
>   
>> Sometimes compilers don't inline all the way through a call stack,
>> i.e., they may have limits on inlining depth.  It's not a matter for
>> the preprocessor, since we're talking methods, not macros.
>>
>> Assembly code template are things like gcc asm statements or
>> .il functions.  Doesn't matter which.  What matters is whether the
>> compiler actually inlines the asm code where you want it.
>>     
>
> That's the kind of thing I was actually wondering about, along with
> portability--consolidating them only works if sizeof(void*) ==
> sizeof(intptr_t) on every platform.  They're the same on the platforms
> SE supports, but maybe there are some oddball embedded platforms
> around.
>
> -John
>
>   
>> Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:54 -0400, Paul Hohensee wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> If the platform-dependent versions are assembly code templates, then
>>>> it's likely at some point that the C++ compiler(s) didn't inline
>>>> properly
>>>> using your suggested code.  I haven't looked in awhile, but I'm pretty
>>>> sure there
>>>> are some places that use your style of code and others that don't for
>>>> because of that.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Hmm, not sure I understand.  AFAIK it makes no difference for inlining
>>> in what header file the inline is defined, as long as both are included
>>> and the compiler (preprocessor) finds it.  Or do you mean something
>>> different by "assembly code templates", like .il files?
>>>
>>> -- Christian
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>
>