The threads proposal as is is limited to shared memories, but we probably want to generalise the language to other shared entities eventually, e.g., globals or tables. At that point, it might be conceivable that we may want to introduce not just atomic get/set for those, but also wait/notify instructions.

However, the current naming scheme for wait/notify instructions does not make explicit that they are operating on a memory. In the interest of forward compatibility, should we fix that? It might also be nice for improved consistency with other memory instructions.

Bikeshedding possibilities:

• memory.atomic.notify, i32.memory.atomic.wait
• memory.atomic.notify, memory.i32.atomic.wait
• memory.atomic.notify, memory.atomic.wait32

Admittedly, neither pair is particularly pretty. Thoughts?