On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 15:51:04 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 10/17/18 9:58 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 13:25:28 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
It's identical to the top one. You now have a new unshared
reference to shared data. This is done WITHOUT any
agreed-upon synchronization.
It isn't, you typo'd it (I originally missed it too).
int *p3 = cast(int*)p2;
vs
int *p3 = p;
It wasn't a typo.
The first example assigns p2, the second assigns p (which is
thread local) _not_ p2 (which is shared), I'm confused.
