On Wednesday, 8 July 2015 at 18:05:13 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
I definetly seen synchronized classes in TDPL years ago. They ought to work today or am I missing something?
They're described in TDPL, but they've never been implemented. Instead, we have synchronized functions like in Java (which TDPL specifically talks about being a bad idea). With a synchronized class, _all_ functions in a class would be synchronized, and a variety of restrictions are placed on the class so that it can make implicitly remove the outer layed or shared on its member variables inside its member functions. With synchronized functions, all they do is lock when you enter them an unlock when you exit them and share the mutex with the other synchronized functions in the class, but they add no other abilities or guarantees.
So, arguably, we should implement synchronized classes as described in TDPL, and that would certainly help with the shared situation, but for whatever reason, no one has ever implemented them.
- Jonathan M Davis
