On Saturday, 27 August 2016 at 21:23:04 UTC, Illuminati wrote:
On Saturday, 27 August 2016 at 17:27:19 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Friday, 26 August 2016 at 23:38:02 UTC, Illuminati wrote:
Does D have any such thing? I'm having to recreate the wheel
here and it isn't fun ;/ Getting in the way of real work ;/
Surely you would think that with the power D has such things
would exist by now?
There doesn't seem to be much demand for that as concurrency
trend keeps moving from making shared access transparent to
minimizing or even removing it completely. And for many
remaining cases locking is acceptable and more simple. Thus I
am not very surprised no one has bothered to work on lock-free
data structures seriously so far.
This is not a solution. D doesn't even seem to any have proper
concurrent storage structures.
It is not a solution indeed, it is explanation why no one has
considered writing one important so far (which you seemed to be
surprised about in the first post). Same for concurrent data
storage structures or anything else that implies "casual"
concurrency - it is too rarely needed.
I am afraid most likely you will need to write your own if this
is a must :(
