[cpp-threads] Memory model counterproposal: synchronized operations

[Peter Dimov]

Nelson, Clark wrote:

> Another part is that the address would in any event have to be
> communicated between threads somehow, and the use of some static
> object is the most plausible way to do it; if you have to use a
> static object anyway to get started, what advantage is gained by
> using the auto object pointed to by the shared static?

It is fairly reasonable to pass the address of a local variable as the 
argument to the thread function (if the parent then does a join.) Doesn't 
OpenMP do that all the time?