Jan Stephan

If (big if) we are basing this on the SYCL API, is there any reason to not just turn alpaka into an actual implementation of SYCL? Minus OpenCL interoperability because...

With C++20 concepts on the horizon I'm now slightly in favour of the current API design. Once those can be used in alpaka I believe we can remove a lot...

Almost a year later there is still no sight of GCC 10.4 :-(

gcc 10.4 has been released. It includes the above-mentioned bugfix.

@psychocoderHPC Was this fixed by #664?

Also a solution to #1439 might help.

After the CI has seen a few revisions in the past weeks I'm fairly content with the current state of things. If nobody objects (@bernhardmgruber, @psychocoderHPC) I believe we can...

It may also be worth noting that the Microsoft standard library developers recommend using `std::optional` for the use case presented in the initial issue comment: [Source](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/stdoptional-how-when-and-why/#the-need-for-not-yet-a-thing).

We would like to get this into alpaka 0.7.0. However, this requires #38 to be resolved.

Wish #1005 (concise atomic functions) was fulfilled by #1185.