Revamped concurrency API

[Bill Baxter]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>>
>> Bartosz Milewski:
>>
>>> With every release of D we are narrowing our options. After D2 and TDPL,
>>> backward compatibility will become a major thing, so every ad-hoc feature in
>>> D2 will have to be carried over.<
>>
>> D is a bit compatible with the C language, but one of the main selling
>> points of D (D1, D2, D3...) is its newer and cleaned up nature.
>> So I think D3 will break compatibility with frozen-D2 in many places,
>> trying to fix the design errors of D2. D3 will not have a quick release
>> schedule, I think it will try to learn from D2 and D1 in a more thought-out
>> way, because D2 will be an essentially complete language, so the purpose of
>> D3 will be mostly to improve things replacing features with better ones that
>> do similar things :-) For example in D3 the switch may use three ... points
>> as in the GCC extension, and so on. In the meantime people will often use D1
>> (until LDC becomes a good D2 compiler).
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> Speaking of switch, I have tried to convince Walter to require either a
> break; or a goto case xxx; at the end of each snippet inside a switch. I was
> surprised by his answer: "but I use fall through all the time!" :o)

But only if there's _some_ statement in between cases, right?

case 1:
case 3:
      break;

should still be allowed.

> I personally think requiring a goto case xxx; is more robust in presence of
> code maintenance because its semantics is invariant to code moves.

Agreed.

--bb