On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 21:29:07 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
in any case it would certainly mess up
the state of everyone involved; which is exactly what happens
win multi-threaded situations.
^ that is very true. And that is why:
- one must not keep shared and local data close together (e.g.
within same cache line)
- one must not implicitly convert local data to shared data
Now, I perfectly understand what Manu wants: for `shared` to stop
being a stupid keyword that nobody uses, and start bringing in
value to the language. At the moment, the compiler happily allows
you to write and read `shared` unhindered, which isn't useful at
all. It also allows you to have weird things like shared
destructors and postblits (which got extended to whole shared
copy ctors in a DIP!). Latter is especially painful when
attempting to define the whole type `shared`.
