On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 08:00:40 -0400, Jason House wrote: > Graham St Jack Wrote: > >> So, what is the design of shared supposed to be then? Its time for >> Walter to buy in and tell us where this is all going - I for one am >> very confused right now. > Thanks for that. Its good to know that there is a plan in there somewhere, even if the details are still very fuzzy. I agree that the lofty goal of improving thread-safety for mere mortals is worthwhile, and that it won't be easy to pull off.
What I was really after though is what the plan is for D2 right now. The whole shared situation in D2 looks like a mess to me, and I would like some reassurance that something simple and tidy will be happening soon. > Here's what I know: > Bartosz's ownership scheme is delayed until at least D3 Shared code > will be sequentially consistent Walter likes the idea of optimizing > away memory barriers that the compiler can prove are unneeded (some > barriers in synchronized sections) Bartosz is rewriting how threads > are done similar to what his blogs hint at Issues that Bartosz hits > with shared are fixed immediately > > Here's what I suspect from a number of emails: Because every class > contains a monitor, Walter/dmd will treat every class as its own monitor > for the purposes of optimization. > > I too wish Walter would advertise the design, but I think the simple > fact is that he doesn't know what the design is!
