D2 Multithreading Architecture - Part 2 - Time to vote if you

[Michel Fortin]

On 2009-06-08 08:43:04 -0400, Jason House <jason.james.house at gmail.com> said:

> Will a community poll be enough to convince Walter to ignore Andrei's 
> reservations? I doubt it. As best as I can tell, Andrei has the 
> following concerns:
> 1. unique types and lent will require extensive changes to code similar 
> to the const system
> 2. ownership tracking will require excessive templating
> 3. Shared memory won't be used much and all we need is message passing
> 
> The last one is used as justification to reconsider multi-threaded design.
> 
> To truly get something rolling, one or more of the following need to be proven:
> 1. Upcoming hardware and software systems will use shared memory over 
> message passing.
> 2. Message passing requires more than just unique value types or arrays 
> to value types. (under such restrictions, library-based solutions 
> become trivial)
> 
> I have to hold my vote until a D-based design incorporating Bartosz's 
> ideas is made. I like unique, move semantics, and lent. I worry that 
> ownership specification will feel unnatural and that reasonable 
> defaults for ownership and lent won't be found.

Same for me, but with a little less worries. I'd sure like D to to be 
race-free when working with shared memory, and I expect Bartosz to come 
up with something good for expressing ownership. But I can't say for 
sure that I will like his proposal before I see it whole.


-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/