On Tuesday, 13 October 2015 at 09:07:54 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 October 2015 at 08:55:26 UTC, Benjamin Thaut
wrote:
I have to agree here. I think synchronized classes are of very
little use, especially because they don't "cast away" shared
in a useful way. It still has to be done manually. I think we
should remove them. Synchronized methods should also be
removed in my eyes. Making each and every object bigger by one
pointer just for the sake of a few synchronized methods
doesn't seem to be a good trade off to me. The entire
synchronized methods give the user the feeling that he simply
slaps synchronized on his class / method and then its thread
safe and he doesn't have to care about threads anymore. In the
real world this is far from true however. So synchronized
methods and classes just give a false sense of thread safety
and should rather be removed.
Actually, I once fell foul of this wrong impression of thread
safety via 'synchronized'. I found a different solution and
dropped synchronized.
I also dropped synchronized and use @nogc mutexes instead. I also
think synchronized methods should be removed. It's also difficult
to explain: what is a "monitor"? when you write a synchronized {
} block, which monitor is taken?
