I would like to suggest again that we rename : shared
It is missnamed since the variable isn't a shared variable between threads,
it is a read only shared variable between threads.
It should realy say : shared : readonly;
I am suggesting we name it static.
Do we realy want to explain over and over again that shared means it becomes
readonly, AND readonly AFTER the fork/new thread. That is a very obfuscated
behaviour.
Maybe it would be better to just have a :readonly; that makes it readonly on
first assigment and then is implicitly shared between threads? And it makes
it possible for a user to create something readonly?
Artur
