The "no gc" crowd

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 10/10/13 5:36 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Thursday, October 10, 2013 10:55:49 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 10/10/13 12:33 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>> I honestly don't think we can solve it a different way without completely
>>> redesigning shared. shared is specifically designed such that you have to
>>> either cast it way to do anything with it
>>
>> no
>>
>>> or write all of your code to
>>> explicitly work with shared, which is not something that generally makes
>>> sense to do unless you're creating a type whose only value is in being
>>> shared across threads.
>>
>> yes
>
> Really? Do you honestly expect the average use of shared to involve creating
> structs or classes which are designed specifically to be used as shared?

Yes. Data structures that can be shared are ALWAYS designed specifically 
for sharing, unless of course it's a trivial type like int. Sharing 
means careful interlocking and atomic operations and barriers and stuff. 
You can't EVER expect to obtain all of that magic by plastering "shared" 
on top of your type.


Andrei