Jason House Wrote:
> > I see, you're a hardcore lockfree programmer. All you can expect from D is > > Sequential Consistency--nothing fancy like C++ weak atomics. But that's for > > the better. > > Far from it! I'm stumbling through in an attempt to teach myself the black > art. I'm probably in my 3rd coding of the project. The first incarnation had > no threads. The 2nd used message passing. The current one is lockless, but > still a work in progress. > Are you sure it's worth the effort? It's extremely hard to get lock-free right, and it often doesn't offer as much speedup as you'd expect. Well, in D it might, because it still doesn't use thin locks. > What about cmpchx (AKA compare and swap). It occurs in a lot of algorithms. > Also, "lock inc" is fundamental to my use of lockless variables. These will either be implemented in the library (inline assembly) or as compiler intrinsic. It's not hard.
