Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 1:40 AM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/10/2020 2:48 PM, Manu wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM Walter Bright via > > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > >> > >> On 1/7/2020 6:31 PM, Manu wrote: > >>> It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait? > >> > >> Because customers have their own schedules. > > > > Customers update their compilers according to their schedules, and > > they can use `-revert` if they're not ready to migrate, that's the > > whole point... > > You didn't answer me though, if it's accepted, and it's implemented... > > why not enable it? and when will we do it? > > Explain the reason for the delay or choice in timing? The transition > > you describe must happen at some time... and delay changes nothing; > > the transition is exactly the same. > > We decided a couple years ago to implement disruptive new features first with > -preview=feature, and some time later make it the default and have a > -revert=feature. > > So far, it has worked well. I don't see any reason to change it. Yes, but we've had the -preview for close to a year now... I'm asking what "some time later" means? Obviously the lib needs to be fixed (that Rainer pointed out).
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/10/2020 2:48 PM, Manu wrote: On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On 1/7/2020 6:31 PM, Manu wrote: It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait? Because customers have their own schedules. Customers update their compilers according to their schedules, and they can use `-revert` if they're not ready to migrate, that's the whole point... You didn't answer me though, if it's accepted, and it's implemented... why not enable it? and when will we do it? Explain the reason for the delay or choice in timing? The transition you describe must happen at some time... and delay changes nothing; the transition is exactly the same. We decided a couple years ago to implement disruptive new features first with -preview=feature, and some time later make it the default and have a -revert=feature. So far, it has worked well. I don't see any reason to change it.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 02/01/2020 09:01, Manu wrote: > On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 4:45 PM Walter Bright via > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: >> >> On 1/1/2020 9:53 PM, Manu wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 3:40 PM Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce >>> wrote: DIP 1024, "Shared Atomics", was accepted without comment. https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1024.md >>> >>> This has been a long time coming! >> >> A New Year's present for all of us! > > Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those > invalid read/writes! :) > Before making the new semantics the default, the next step should be to make druntime and phobos compile with the preview-switch. That didn't seem like a no-brainer to me when I recently tried that (but only for a couple of minutes), especially with shared being applied to class/struct declarations.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/7/2020 6:31 PM, Manu wrote: > > It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait? > > Because customers have their own schedules. Customers update their compilers according to their schedules, and they can use `-revert` if they're not ready to migrate, that's the whole point... You didn't answer me though, if it's accepted, and it's implemented... why not enable it? and when will we do it? Explain the reason for the delay or choice in timing? The transition you describe must happen at some time... and delay changes nothing; the transition is exactly the same.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/7/2020 6:31 PM, Manu wrote: It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait? Because customers have their own schedules.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Wednesday, 8 January 2020 at 02:31:24 UTC, Manu wrote: On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 12:20 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait? Since @safe and shared is all syntactical in nature then all these problems can be avoided by just adding compiler switches: -ignore-shared, -ignore-safe etc...
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 12:20 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/6/2020 10:17 PM, Manu wrote: > > Well it was a preview for an unaccepted DIP, so it could have been > > withdrawn. I guess I have increased confidence now, but it still seems > > unnecessary to delay. > > Preview means for accepted DIPs as well when they break existing code. > > >> Don't really have a schedule at the moment. It'll likely be at least a > >> year. > > A year? That's disappointing. What is the reason to delay this? It > > doesn't break anything, and it likely fixes bugs on contact. > > It breaks all code that manipulates shared data directly, whether it was > correctly written or not. It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait?
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/6/2020 10:17 PM, Manu wrote: Well it was a preview for an unaccepted DIP, so it could have been withdrawn. I guess I have increased confidence now, but it still seems unnecessary to delay. Preview means for accepted DIPs as well when they break existing code. Don't really have a schedule at the moment. It'll likely be at least a year. A year? That's disappointing. What is the reason to delay this? It doesn't break anything, and it likely fixes bugs on contact. It breaks all code that manipulates shared data directly, whether it was correctly written or not.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Thursday, 2 January 2020 at 09:41:02 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 1/2/2020 12:01 AM, Manu wrote: Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those invalid read/writes! :) It's already been merged! https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/10209 Some really fast work there :-) Nice. There was some initial work on shared a long while back: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/commit/276a69327652be8d95607cec142790baae110d0c It's interesting it took this long to push it to the end. :)
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:15 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/3/2020 3:41 AM, Manu wrote: > > We've already had this -preview for quite a while; I have enabled it > > in an experimental context, but I don't tend to write and deploy code > > that depends on future-features. I stick to the current language when > > writing code I intend to share. > > Do you have some sense of when we will make this part of the language? > > The DIP is accepted, but it didn't describe that it would be enabled > > at some future time...? > > You shouldn't be reluctant to use preview switches. It's only that way to ease > the transition for people, not because we're going to withdraw it. Well it was a preview for an unaccepted DIP, so it could have been withdrawn. I guess I have increased confidence now, but it still seems unnecessary to delay. > Don't really have a schedule at the moment. It'll likely be at least a year. A year? That's disappointing. What is the reason to delay this? It doesn't break anything, and it likely fixes bugs on contact.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/3/2020 3:41 AM, Manu wrote: We've already had this -preview for quite a while; I have enabled it in an experimental context, but I don't tend to write and deploy code that depends on future-features. I stick to the current language when writing code I intend to share. Do you have some sense of when we will make this part of the language? The DIP is accepted, but it didn't describe that it would be enabled at some future time...? You shouldn't be reluctant to use preview switches. It's only that way to ease the transition for people, not because we're going to withdraw it. Don't really have a schedule at the moment. It'll likely be at least a year.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Thursday, 2 January 2020 at 06:40:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 1/1/2020 9:53 PM, Manu wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 3:40 PM Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: DIP 1024, "Shared Atomics", was accepted without comment. https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1024.md This has been a long time coming! A New Year's present for all of us! Thank you Walter!
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 8:35 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/2/2020 11:31 PM, Manu wrote: > > Okay, although I don't really understand; if we have accepted the > > feature, but we don't enable the feature... then nobody will use it, > > and no code will be written that's compatible. > > This kinda seems like a future-acceptance? > > Nobody enables `-preview`s. > > Those who need it (you!) will use it. That's what matters. We've already had this -preview for quite a while; I have enabled it in an experimental context, but I don't tend to write and deploy code that depends on future-features. I stick to the current language when writing code I intend to share. Do you have some sense of when we will make this part of the language? The DIP is accepted, but it didn't describe that it would be enabled at some future time...?
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/2/2020 11:31 PM, Manu wrote: Okay, although I don't really understand; if we have accepted the feature, but we don't enable the feature... then nobody will use it, and no code will be written that's compatible. This kinda seems like a future-acceptance? Nobody enables `-preview`s. Those who need it (you!) will use it. That's what matters.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:20 AM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/2/2020 4:17 AM, Manu wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 7:45 PM Walter Bright via > > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > >> > >> On 1/2/2020 12:01 AM, Manu wrote: > >>> Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those > >>> invalid read/writes! :) > >> > >> It's already been merged! > >> > >> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/10209 > >> > >> Some really fast work there :-) > > > > Doesn't the acceptance of the DIP suggest that it should no longer be > > `-preview`; it should be enabled and an option to disable the feature > > via `-revert` should be introduced? > > We switch to -revert after some time has passed (a year or two) so people have > time to adapt. > > > Or short of that, a deprecation message should be emit when compiling? > > I'm not sure that's necessary with the preview/revert switches. Okay, although I don't really understand; if we have accepted the feature, but we don't enable the feature... then nobody will use it, and no code will be written that's compatible. This kinda seems like a future-acceptance? Nobody enables `-preview`s.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/2/2020 4:17 AM, Manu wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 7:45 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On 1/2/2020 12:01 AM, Manu wrote: Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those invalid read/writes! :) It's already been merged! https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/10209 Some really fast work there :-) Doesn't the acceptance of the DIP suggest that it should no longer be `-preview`; it should be enabled and an option to disable the feature via `-revert` should be introduced? We switch to -revert after some time has passed (a year or two) so people have time to adapt. Or short of that, a deprecation message should be emit when compiling? I'm not sure that's necessary with the preview/revert switches.
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 7:45 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/2/2020 12:01 AM, Manu wrote: > > Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those > > invalid read/writes! :) > > It's already been merged! > > https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/10209 > > Some really fast work there :-) Doesn't the acceptance of the DIP suggest that it should no longer be `-preview`; it should be enabled and an option to disable the feature via `-revert` should be introduced? Or short of that, a deprecation message should be emit when compiling?
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/2/2020 12:01 AM, Manu wrote: Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those invalid read/writes! :) It's already been merged! https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/10209 Some really fast work there :-)
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 4:45 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On 1/1/2020 9:53 PM, Manu wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 3:40 PM Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce > > wrote: > >> > >> DIP 1024, "Shared Atomics", was accepted without comment. > >> > >> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1024.md > > > > This has been a long time coming! > > A New Year's present for all of us! Quick quick, we need a PR to issue deprecation messages for those invalid read/writes! :)
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On 1/1/2020 9:53 PM, Manu wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 3:40 PM Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: DIP 1024, "Shared Atomics", was accepted without comment. https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1024.md This has been a long time coming! A New Year's present for all of us!
Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 3:40 PM Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > DIP 1024, "Shared Atomics", was accepted without comment. > > https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1024.md This has been a long time coming!
DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted
DIP 1024, "Shared Atomics", was accepted without comment. https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1024.md
