• Crayo List (3/3) Dec 10 2018 Are there atomic equivalents of bt(), btc(), bts(), btr() ... etc
• Adam D. Ruppe (3/5) Dec 10 2018 Those are intrinsics that compile into a single cpu instruction,
• Crayo List (9/14) Dec 10 2018 Thanks Adam,

Crayo List <crayolist gmail.com> writes:

Are there atomic equivalents of bt(), btc(), bts(), btr() ... etc 
from core.bitop?

Thanks

Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 10 December 2018 at 23:20:22 UTC, Crayo List wrote:
 Are there atomic equivalents of bt(), btc(), bts(), btr() ... 
 etc from core.bitop?

Those are intrinsics that compile into a single cpu instruction, 
so they are probably already atomic...

Crayo List <crayolist gmail.com> writes:

On Tuesday, 11 December 2018 at 01:37:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 10 December 2018 at 23:20:22 UTC, Crayo List wrote:
 Are there atomic equivalents of bt(), btc(), bts(), btr() ... 
 etc from core.bitop?

 Those are intrinsics that compile into a single cpu 
 instruction, so they are probably already atomic...

Thanks Adam,

They need to be prefixed with 'lock' (on x86) in order to be 
atomic.
That's what _interlockedbittestandset() on Windows does.
And what this page says; 
https://www.felixcloutier.com/x86/LOCK.html

It may be possible to implement using asm { }, but I was 
wondering if there wasn't something out there already doing it.