From: chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/11/2025 1:05 AM, David Brown wrote:   
   > On 10/12/2025 21:10, MitchAlsup wrote:   
   >>   
   >> David Brown  posted:   
   >>   
   >   
   >>> OK.  I can see the advantages of that - though there are disadvantages   
   >>> too (such as being unable to control a limit on the number of retries,   
   >>> or add SW tracking of retry counts for metrics).   
   >>   
   >> esm attempts to allow SW to program with features previously available   
   >> only at the µCode level. µCode allows for many µinstructions to execute   
   >> before/between any real instructions.   
   >>   
   >>>                                  
    Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â  My main concern was   
   >>> the disconnect between how the code was written and what it actually   
   >>> does.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Perhaps it would be better to think of these sequences in assembler   
   > rather than C - you want tighter control than C normally allows, and you   
   > don't want optimisers re-arranging things too much.   
      
   Right. Way back before C/C++ 11 I would code all of my sensitive   
   lock/wait-free code in assembly.   
      
   [...]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)