Testing some singleton implementations
Stanislav Blinov
stanislav.blinov at gmail.com
Mon Mar 3 05:38:36 PST 2014
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 00:29:49 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
> On Friday, 7 February 2014 at 20:09:29 UTC, Stanislav Blinov
>> This needs more serious review, even if only for academic
>> purposes. I'll see what I can come up with :)
>> In the meantime, if anyone has anything to add to the list,
>> please chime in!
>
> Hi Martin, Sean, Stanislav et al
>
> I would quite like to code-review atomics.d
When I said "review" I meant this specific issue, e.g.
singletons. Since then I got a bit carried away into general
issues with 'shared' qualifier, so for me the quirks of
singletons are on hold for now. But if you find other bugs (in
atomic.d or anywhere else), inconsistencies, documentation
omissions, etc., please post them. This thread clearly shows the
value of more thorough testing. Who knows how long it would've
taken to notice that atomicLoad() issue if Andrej hadn't created
this thread.
> and maybe think about improving the documentation and adding a
> few comments, especially
> for the purposes of knowledge capture in this sticky field.
>
> Would that be ok, in principle?
IMO submitting issues, enhacnements, documentation updates is
always a good idea. Though don't be surprised if your submissions
hang in the air for a while, it's pretty common esp. when people
responsible for the original code are busy with other things.
> There are a few rough edges here and there _in my very unworthy
> opinion_, and the odd bit that doesn't look quite right somehow
> especially in the x64 branch. If I could even find the odd bug
> then that would be good. Or rather bad.
>
> A big amount of work has clearly gone into this module. So, many
> beers to Sean and others who put their time into it. Research
> can
> be quite a pig too on a project of this kind, I would imagine.
Use bugzilla (https://d.puremagic.com/issues/) to submit
issues/enhancement requests; or submit ready pull requests on
github so that they can be reviewed, improved, and if all is
good, eventually accepted. It's best done that way since it
presents clear history and more focused discussion, and because
threads in this NG sink rather quickly.
> There is quite a list of things that I'm currently unclear about
> when I read through the D, and this might mean me whimpering for
> help occasionally..?
I don't see a big red banner saying "don't post your questions
here" anywhere ;)
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list