On Wednesday, 6 August 2014 at 23:01:11 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Somewhat sadly, this code does compile:
shared S s1, s2;
s1 = s2;
I have no idea what semantics this may have from just reading the
snippet. IMHO killing it will be a good thing and totally in line
with your comments about shared you have made during DConf
conversations.
However, assigning Variant objects holding such structs does
not compile, which in turn leads to the reported bug in
std.concurrency. Now it seems to me that the only way is to
adapt Variant to allow such assignments, otherwise we'd be
breaking existing code. Thoughts appreciated.
I think biggest std.concurrency problem is that people try to use
`shared` as poor replacement to `unique`/`isolated` and this is
not what it is supposed to mean. Making `Unique` work with
std.concurrency can be a good direction to make things much less
confusing.
