On Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 08:00:44 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
If you mean process shared memory, I agree that there are many
valid cases where you want to be in control of the memory. I
have been thinking about extracting the core of the
synchronization primitives into @system
On Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 07:04:49 UTC, Arun
Chandrasekaran wrote:
Hi,
What are the reasoning behind core.sync.* primitives being
classes and not structs?
There are several reasons as far as I know:
1) Structs in D can't have non-trivial constructors - i.e. you
can't call
On Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 07:04:49 UTC, Arun
Chandrasekaran wrote:
Hi,
What are the reasoning behind core.sync.* primitives being
classes and not structs? This prevents them from being placing
on shared memory.
s/placing/placed/
