A breach of immutability due to memory implicit conversions to immutable without synchronisation, maybe??

[Kagamin]

On Monday, 12 November 2018 at 09:19:26 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> The MODIFY line changes the value where the pointer looks. I'm 
> asking whether it's possible that either READ happens before 
> MODIFY (which would be v. bad). Using two reads instead of one 
> was just to turn the (potential) ordering bug in to a 
> (potential) breach of immutability.

For that you will need READ to happen before atomicLoad (in which 
case it will just dereference null pointer?) or MODIFY to happen 
after atomicStore?