Thin Locks in D

[Sean Kelly]

== Quote from superdan (super at dan.org)'s article
> Leandro Lucarella Wrote:
> > Sean Kelly, el 24 de julio a las 23:09 me escribiste:
> > > Lionello Lunesu wrote:
> > > >"Walter Bright" <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote in message
> > > >news:g6b1ae$up4$1 at digitalmars.com...
> > > >>http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/
> > > >>
> > > >>and of course on reddit:
> > > >>
> > > >>http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/
> > > >I remember reading somewhere that critical-sections on Windows do just that.
> > >
> > > They pretty much do.  And futexes are largely the same thing in Linux.
> >
> > So, why D must reinvent the wheel, duplicating a well known technique done
> > in most modern OS? This will only add overhead to D.
> >
> > Please, at least make it conditional only to OSs that don't provide this
> > optimization by themselves.
> there is no reinvention. the man quotes his sources. at most there is
reimplementation. and that's unavoidable as far as i understand. thin locks must
be integrated with the object model so they place that word right there and do
shit with it.

Yup.  I think the point is trying to avoid a cache miss from having the monitor in
a separate memory block.


Sean