On Thursday, 18 October 2018 at 19:04:58 UTC, Erik van Velzen
wrote:
On Thursday, 18 October 2018 at 17:47:29 UTC, Stanislav Blinov
wrote:
On Thursday, 18 October 2018 at 17:17:37 UTC, Atila Neves
wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2018 at 18:46:45 UTC, Manu wrote:
Assuming the rules above: "can't read or write to members",
and the understanding that `shared` methods are expected to
have threadsafe implementations (because that's the whole
point), what are the risks from allowing T* -> shared(T)*
conversion?
int i;
tid.send(&i);
++i; // oops, data race
Doesn't work. No matter what you show Manu or Simen here they
think it's just a bad contrived example. You can't sway them
by the fact that the compiler currently *prevents* this from
happening.
Manu said clearly that the receiving thread won't be able to
read or write the pointer.
Yes it will, by casting `shared` away. *Just like* his proposed
"wrap everything into" struct will. There's exactly no difference.
Because int or int* does not have threadsafe member functions.
int doesn't have any member functions. Or it can have as many as
you like per UFCS. Same goes for structs. Because "methods" are
just free functions in disguise, so that whole distinction in
Manu's proposal is a weaksauce convention at best.
You can still disagree on the merits, but so far it has been
demonstrated as a sound idea.
No, it hasn't been.
