Something needs to happen with shared, and soon.

[Timon Gehr]

On 11/12/2012 02:48 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
> On 2012-11-11 18:46:10 +0000, Alex Rønne Petersen <alex at lycus.org> said:
>
>> Something needs to be done about shared. I don't know what, but the
>> current situation is -- and I'm really not exaggerating here --
>> laughable. I think we either need to just make it perfectly clear that
>> shared is for documentation purposes and nothing else, or, figure out
>> an alternative system to shared, because I don't see shared actually
>> being useful for real world work no matter what we do with it.
>
> I feel like the concurrency aspect of D2 was rushed in the haste of
> having it ready for TDPL. Shared, deadlock-prone synchronized classes[1]
> as well as destructors running in any thread (thanks GC!) plus a couple
> of other irritants makes the whole concurrency scheme completely flawed
> if you ask me. D2 needs a near complete overhaul on the concurrency front.
>
> I'm currently working on a big code base in C++. While I do miss D when
> it comes to working with templates as well as for its compilation speed
> and a few other things, I can't say I miss D much when it comes to
> anything touching concurrency.
>
> [1]: http://michelf.ca/blog/2012/mutex-synchonization-in-d/
>

I am always irritated by shared-by-default static variables.