It must be binding to be useful in multi threaded scenarios Ben
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:bitc-dev- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Rice > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 2:24 PM > To: Discussions about the BitC language > Subject: Re: [bitc-dev] Is immutability part of type? > > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> > wrote: > > So I started a note intending to ask where mutability constraint > > annotations should be allowed, and investigating various options. It > > was *amazing* how fast I ran into cases where two completely > > reasonable understandings led immediately to conflicts. All cases > > below are shallow unless otherwise noted, and I'm only considering > > unboxed types. So consider the difference (if any) between S1 and S2. > > silly question, for the purpose of this discussion is the following statement > from the spec binding, I get the feeling that the answer is no, but if the > answer is yes, that narrows the scope of my thoughts > > 3.8 Mutable > > Unless modified by the mutable keyword, the preceding types yield > immutable instantiations. > _______________________________________________ > bitc-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
