[Insight-developers] itkTimeStamp Test Failures Mistery

[Sean McBride]

On 2/18/09 5:48 PM, Tom Vercauteren said:

>> It would probably be better if m_ModifiedTime itself was passed to the
>> various atomic increment functions.  The "problem" there is that the
>> type of m_ModifiedTime would need to be of different type/size on
>> different platforms.
>>
>> I could attempt such a patch if you'd like...
>
>Is this possible? itkTimeStampTime has to be a global (static)
>variable whereas m_ModifiedTime has to be local (member). So unless
>there is an atomic function that does "increment one variable and
>assign its value to another", I think I am missing something.

Ahhh, I see.  OTOH, itkTimeStampTime is an implementation detail, it
seems the class' public API doesn't require its existence.  Maybe we
could somehow do without it?  Though I'm not seeing how, at the moment...

-- 
____________________________________________________________
Sean McBride, B. Eng                 sean at rogue-research.com
Rogue Research                        www.rogue-research.com 
Mac Software Developer              Montréal, Québec, Canada