On 08-06-2012 09:00, dennis luehring wrote:
>>We clearly agree completely; this is exactly what I'm saying in
the paragraph you
>>quoted below. What i'm*also* saying is that the 'incorrectness' of
it is harmless
>>in practice - so I'm not sure that it should be forbidden, and
handled specially
>>(which would be necessary in the inferred-purity cases).
but it makes no sense to cripple an feature like pure half-way - pure is
clean and well defined (still not perfect) - but you talking about
making it very stupid and sensless "'incorrectness' of it is harmless
in practice" ... "Yes, they can be used incorrectly, but I'd expect
anybody working with shared to know what they're doing" - no they don't
- sorry, haven't you any real experience in the threading world or why
don't you see the problems introdcing shared in pure
Without taking either side, I'm just gonna point out that this post is
very incomprehensible and doesn't seem to bring any actual argument to
the table.
--
Alex Rønne Petersen
[email protected]
http://lycus.org
