On Thursday, July 05, 2018 11:31:15 FeepingCreature via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 10:47:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > At this point, to operate on anything that's shared, either
> > means using atomics or protecting the data with a mutex (be
> > that with a
On Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 10:47:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[cut]
- Jonathan M Davis
I think I've just read a similar explanation about shared written
by you some months ago. It seems that a lot of users doesn't
understand what shared really is.
Probably a pinned article should be
On Thursday, 5 July 2018 at 11:31:15 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 10:47:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
[...]
Once we have DIP1000, can accessing shared class members in a
synchronized class (optionally? implicitly?) result in scoped
rvalues?
We already have
On Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 10:47:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
At this point, to operate on anything that's shared, either
means using atomics or protecting the data with a mutex (be
that with a synchronized block / function or a mutex object)
and temporarily casting away shared while
On Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 10:47:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
At this point, to operate on anything that's shared, either
means using atomics or protecting the data with a mutex (be
that with a synchronized block / function or a mutex object)
and temporarily casting away shared while
On Wednesday, July 04, 2018 09:25:27 Boris-Barboris via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Given the pain of shared usage with std and pretty much every
> library in existence, I cowboyed the server without this
> qualifier. One of the mechanisms required atomic class reference
> compare-and-set, and the
Given the pain of shared usage with std and pretty much every
library in existence, I cowboyed the server without this
qualifier. One of the mechanisms required atomic class reference
compare-and-set, and the class reference is not shared, because
it would otherwise require, like, 30 or 40
