[Issue 8993] Implement unique references/isolated memory

d-bugmail at puremagic.com d-bugmail at puremagic.com
Sat Nov 10 08:38:06 PST 2012


http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8993



--- Comment #3 from Sönke Ludwig <sludwig at outerproduct.org> 2012-11-10 08:38:03 PST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think it's a bit too late to add new keywords to the language, other than
> ones prefixed with "__", and we certainly wouldn't want something this useful
> to be subject to such annoying-to-type keywords...
> 
> This seems like a thing for D3 *if* D3 ever becomes a thing.

Even with __ it would be better than nothing. I think it's almost safe to say
that current D is almost unusable in conjunction with immutable/shared
(objects) and that's ironically one of the areas where it tries to shine. I
have tried numerous times to cleanly reimplement certain multithreaded
functionality using it and _never_ got it running without just so many casts
that the result was not only as unsafe/unchecked as the original, but also
unreadable und badly usable.


I apologize in advance for the following (general) rant:

The attitude of implementing ad-hoc solutions, not listening to valid
objections and then declaring the language as stable is a very foolish
development approach. The way shared was introduced was not the only thing in
the past that went this way.

Things like these made me really frustrated with D multiple times, to the point
where I was seriously looking out for alternatives - the end result was pure
disregard/disinterest for the corresponding language parts. And I think that
there is quite a number of people who just gave up on either the language or on
certain parts, and the resulting silence creates a dangerous deceived feeling
of statisfaction.

The current mode of development is shizophrenic, stabilizing an obviously
unfinished language and, from time to time, introducing new, breaking things
anyway. There absolutely needs to be a way to still let innovation and
refinement happen, be it in a separate branch (called 3.x or something else
doesn't matter) or in the form of allowing new features as long as they are
backwards-compatible (e.g. using the __ way). Of course the constant breakage
of the past is bad, but stagnation at this point could possibly be the start of
a slow, starving death.

Sorry again, but I've seen D make so many mistakes in the past and that it has
done a lot more things right is no excuse for that.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------


More information about the Digitalmars-d-bugs mailing list