> Have you read the post in question? Its a good introduction to C++ Concurrency / memory models. Yes, I have. And yes, I am familiar with the C++ concurrency/

> Have you read the post in question? Its a good introduction to C++ Concurrency / memory models. Yes, I have. And yes, I am familiar with the C++ concurrency/memory models discussed here. And, to be clear, nothing in the article is doing anything that couldn't be done just as clearly with std::atomic<bool>& as with std::atomic<bool>*. Obviously, if you actually want to be able to assign to the pointer, then you need the pointer form. > Indeed, one can argue that when using atomics, the more explicit "store" and "load" functions should be used instead. Yes, this is the style I strongly prefer. Of course, here it doesn't matter between a = blah->load(); blah->store(b); or a = blah.load(); blah.store(b); and choosing to use the pointer form is often just introducing nullability where you don't need it.