On Saturday, 8 March 2014 at 09:12:49 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 8 March 2014 at 08:09:29 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
Why do you need synchronized? Are you building some kind of
multithreading library?
I don't need it yet. I'm just exploring features of D and
trying to learn how to implement them. The real problem isn't
that I can't use synchronized, but rather that the compiler is
not aware of my target. I haven't searched through GDC's
source code yet, but I suspect there will be more problems in
the near future if the compiler is not taught about this target.
Mike
Synchronized block tells to the thread scheduler to lock this
piece of code for this thread. No other thread may enter this
block while this thread is in it.
The compiler generates a library call that does the work. The
thread scheduler is operating system dependent and not related to
hardware.
Anyway, this is valid code and should pass. I have to remove all
synchronized words when compiling the runtime. "Nothreads"
directive might be useful, in this case it should just ignore the
synchronized word.
When there is something os dependent, there should always be a
nosystem block or default case which has reasonable default
values or just empty variables/functions if they are not used. In
D there is version(NoSystem).
In gcc build we know the host we are building and the target we
are building for. There is only one operating system that the
generated compiler supports. (or none like in arm-none-eabi) I
think all operating system related in the compiler should be in
compile time directives and have no runtime code for that. When
we get the --with-cpu- etc statements work, we may tune the
compiler even more.
