Subject: Re: [boost] [atomic] Probable documentation issue: how do we knowatomic is safe and/or efficient?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-24 09:29:55
John Maddock wrote:
> I'm sure the answer to (a) is that it is correct, but I was surprised that
> atomic<int> relied on the volatile modifier for thread safe load/stores on
> MSVC, I had assumed that something more than that would have been
> required, but I know I'm out of date on this stuff!
"volatile" was changed in VC++ 8.0 to guarantee acquire/release semantics,
then changed back in 2012 to only do so when /volatile:ms is active, which
it is by default, except on ARM.