[Proposal] Weak reference implementation for D

[Sean Kelly]

On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 19:51:00 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 18:57:16 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> Perhaps I missed it from skimming, but why are we using atomic 
>> operations here anyway?  Has testing revealed that it's 
>> necessary?
>
> I presume you don't mean running some code and then seeing if 
> it breaks as a test to see if atomic operation are necessary?
>
> Synchronisation *must* be done by design.

Well sure, but why not use a Mutex?  What does trying to sort out 
a correct lock-free algorithm gain us here?