[cpp-threads] Re: Increment/decrement operators on atomics package

[Peter Dimov]

Raul Silvera wrote:

> Also, note that RMW operations are orders of magnitude more expensive
> than regular accesses in pretty much all architectures. In some platforms 
> they
> may require acquiring a lock. So I believe the programmer should make it
> explicit whether RMW semantics are required for each specific operation.

Isn't it likely that (given the SC consensus) _any_ operation, even a load, 
on an atomic<> would effectively be a RMW? (Remote write atomicity, IRIW and 
all that...)