>>30
Say what otherwise? Reread the link I posted:

IMO, 4 and 5 are basically hopeless. They provide an abstraction that is out of touch with the underlying hardware, AND is harder to program. Why would anyone possibly want this?

I agree with him. A lot of implementation complexity for what gain? If you're dealing with anything other than low-contention resources you'll be raped by redos and cache-line RFOs. And this completely ignores NUMA -- AMD already has it, and with Nehalem so will Intel. It's the future; message or ownership passing can take advantage of it.

Also, what is this, April 1st? Link to papers, not wikipedia. Wikipedia is a starting point for your research, not a definitive resource.