On 8/31/25 3:52 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> From the book:
>
>> Note: This feature is not supported by dmd 2.098.1.
What I meant there was "not yet; maybe in the future."
> Which is why I recommend removing the whole discussion.
Fair.
> If you want to ensure some order of locking you need to do it manually.
> Even before 2.098.1
Ensuring order of locking is not something that the programmer *may*
want. The hardcoded order of two synchronized blocks is a program bug
because it leads to a deadlock.
Ali
