Bartosz Milewski Missing post

[Sean Kelly]

== Quote from Leandro Lucarella (llucax at gmail.com)'s article
> Jason House, el 28 de mayo a las 08:45 me escribiste:
>
> > Maybe people are waiting for Walter to go through all the hard work of
> > implementing this stuff before complaining that it's crap and
> > proclaiming Walter should have done in the first place?
>
> No, I don't see any point in saying what I said above, because I don't
> think anything will change. If I didn't like some little detail, that
> could worth discussing because it has any chance to change Walter/Bartoz
> mind, but saying "I think all the model is way too complex" don't help
> much IMHO =)

That was basically the complaint about the const design for D2, and
it did end up being simplified.  I also think it would have been simplified
further if anyone knew how to do so without losing any required functionality.

Regarding the shared proposal so far, I think D will always support sharing
memory across processes so the issue is really where to post the sign that
says "here be monsters."  Bartosz has come up with a model that would
provide complete (?) verifiable data integrity, and therefore makes the
domain of "safe" shared-memory programming as large as possible
(deadlocks aside, of course).

However, the overarching question in my mind is whether we really want
to build so much support into the language for something that is intended
to be used sparingly at best.  I can just see someone saying "so you have all
these new keywords and all this stuff and you're saying that despite all this
I'm really not supposed to use any of it?"  This is an area where community
feedback would be very valuable, I'd think.