Something needs to happen with shared, and soon.

Jacob Carlborg doob at me.com
Wed Nov 14 01:30:18 PST 2012


On 2012-11-14 08:56, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> Being able to have double-checked locking work would be valuable, and having
> memory barriers would reduce race condition weirdness when locks aren't used
> properly, so I think that it would be desirable to have memory barriers. If
> there's a major performance penalty though, that might be a reason not to do
> it. Certainly, I don't think that there's any question that adding memory
> barriers won't make it so that you don't need mutexes or synchronized blocks
> or whatnot. shared's primary benefit is in logically separating normal code
> from code that must shared data across threads and making it possible for the
> compiler to optimize based on the fact that it knows that a variable is
> thread-local.

If there is a problem with efficiency in some cases then the developer 
can use __gshared and manually handling things. But of course, we don't 
want the developer to have to do this in most cases.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list