Closed Chuvi-w closed 2 months ago
https://github.com/ETLCPP/etl/blob/a98d387a118281eb6bcd45ebbbf002ddc6626fe7/include/etl/atomic/atomic_gcc_sync.h#L170 Probably __atomic_fetch_sub(&value, 1), etl::memory_order_seq_cst; should be replaced to __atomic_fetch_sub(&value, 1, etl::memory_order_seq_cst);
__atomic_fetch_sub(&value, 1), etl::memory_order_seq_cst;
__atomic_fetch_sub(&value, 1, etl::memory_order_seq_cst);
I doubt this is a mistake. That's why I created an issue, not a pull request.
You are correct, it is a mistake. I'm surprised that it doesn't show up in the syntax check test script.
Fixed 20.38.11
https://github.com/ETLCPP/etl/blob/a98d387a118281eb6bcd45ebbbf002ddc6626fe7/include/etl/atomic/atomic_gcc_sync.h#L170 Probably
__atomic_fetch_sub(&value, 1), etl::memory_order_seq_cst;
should be replaced to__atomic_fetch_sub(&value, 1, etl::memory_order_seq_cst);
I doubt this is a mistake. That's why I created an issue, not a pull request.