On 2013-10-10 04:35, Walter Bright wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> I really urge you to make this a separate project. It's not
trivial. Logically, it's sound, but the implementation will be very
difficult. I also think Sean (and probably others) should be involved
for that discussion.
>
> Make what a separate project? The destruction of objects by the GC in
local threads? It already is not part of the ref counting proposal.
>
As far as I can tell, the ref counting proposal is not viable without
it, as long as you insist on non-atomic RC increments and decrements.
How can it possibly not be a prerequisite to this, and therefore part of
the proposal?
Unless you are saying now that atomic ref counting is OK?
I'm going by your previous statement:
> I very much want to avoid requiring atomic counts - it's a major
performance penalty.
-Steve
Is this the last email in the conversation? In that case I think you
clearly mark that with a post.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
