On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 6:35 AM Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On 10/16/18 9:25 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > > On 10/15/18 2:46 PM, Manu wrote: > > >>> From there, it opens up another critical opportunity; T* -> shared(T)* > >> promotion. > >> Const would be useless without T* -> const(T)* promotion. Shared > >> suffers a similar problem. > >> If you write a lock-free queue for instance, and all the methods are > >> `shared` (ie, threadsafe), then under the current rules, you can't > >> interact with the object when it's not shared, and that's fairly > >> useless. > >> > > Oh, I didn't see this part. Completely agree with Timon on this, no > implicit conversions should be allowed.
Why? > If you want to have a lock-free implementation of something, you can > abstract the assignments and reads behind the proper mechanisms anyway, > and still avoid locking (casting is not locking). Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. Can you clarify?
