Clean up otm_queue - #3
Open
dnadlinger wants to merge 6 commits into
Open
Conversation
Closed
This is a follow-up to the OtMQueue split.
The producer count is only used for debug asserts, so replace it with a property.
This was an entirely gratuitous restriction.
Author
|
Just noticed that this is still open. You probably want to merge this at some point to avoid accidentally making elements with elaborate conversions The existing documentation was also unnecessarily mysterious in places regarding "NEVER CHANGING CPU CORES." (I originally fixed the version in wekapp for the D memory model.) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This removes a few remnants from before OtMQueue was split (which is indeed a good idea), clarifies some comments, and allows non-
core.atomic-compatible element types.I'll probably post another PR that briefly explains the implementation ("phases"/…) tomorrow.