That would be the easiest thing, yeah. I had some more complex ideas in the concurrency list, but dunno if they're practical.
Sent from my iPhone On Aug 30, 2011, at 5:37 PM, dsimcha <dsim...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On 8/30/2011 8:01 PM, Sean Kelly wrote: >> I'd like to say that the 'shared' attribute on member functions should just >> mean "make this member visible through a shared reference" > > So the idea would just be that shared is a programmer-verified seal of > approval that "yes, this is thread-safe without the user of the object taking > any additional precautions"? >
