On 2009-06-08 08:43:04 -0400, Jason House <jason.james.ho...@gmail.com> said:
Will a community poll be enough to convince Walter to ignore Andrei's
reservations? I doubt it. As best as I can tell, Andrei has the
following concerns:
1. unique types and lent will require extensive changes to code similar
to the const system
2. ownership tracking will require excessive templating
3. Shared memory won't be used much and all we need is message passing
The last one is used as justification to reconsider multi-threaded design.
To truly get something rolling, one or more of the following need to be proven:
1. Upcoming hardware and software systems will use shared memory over
message passing.
2. Message passing requires more than just unique value types or arrays
to value types. (under such restrictions, library-based solutions
become trivial)
I have to hold my vote until a D-based design incorporating Bartosz's
ideas is made. I like unique, move semantics, and lent. I worry that
ownership specification will feel unnatural and that reasonable
defaults for ownership and lent won't be found.
Same for me, but with a little less worries. I'd sure like D to to be
race-free when working with shared memory, and I expect Bartosz to come
up with something good for expressing ownership. But I can't say for
sure that I will like his proposal before I see it whole.
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/
