On 04/05/17 13:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 4 May 2017 at 10:24, Toebs Douglass wrote: >> Atomic in this context, I believe, actually only really means the >> absence of word-tearing; you won't write half your int and then get >> swapped out and then write the other half later. > > No, "atomic" in the C++ memory model has a specific meaning, more than > just guaranteeing no word-tearing. Even on a CPU architecture where > word-tearing is impossible, the use of atomic operations rather than > non-atomic ones gives information to the compiler that affects the > semantics. Inherently volatile, kindafing? lay off the optimisation and caching in registers, etc? I'm afraid I know almost no C++, so I'm guessing from my C knowledge.
