Re: [boost] [atomic] Probable documentation issue: how do weknowatomic is safe and/or efficient?

...

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thread safe load/stores on MSVC, I had assumed that something more than that would have been required, but I know I'm out of date on this stuff!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.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/12a04hfd.aspx

So does this mean that Boost.Atomic is perhaps not safe after all? John.