On Saturday, 20 October 2018 at 16:18:53 UTC, aliak wrote:
class C {
void f();
void g() shared;
}
void t1(shared C c) {
c.g; // ok
c.f; // error
}
void t2(shared C c) {
c.g; // ok
c.f; // error
}
auto c = new C();
spawn(&t1, c);
spawn(&t2, c);
c.f; // ok
c.g; // ok
Those are not "ok". They're only "ok" under Manu's proposal so
long as the author of C promises (via documentation) that that's
indeed "ok". There can be no statically-enforced guarantees that
those calls are "ok", or that issuing them in that order is "ok".
Yet Manu keeps insisting that somehow there is.
