DIP 1024--Shared Atomics--Community Review Round 1
no at spam.net
Tue Oct 1 16:22:36 UTC 2019
On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 10:40:52 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
My feedback: What is the proposal?
"By prohibiting direct access to shared data, the user will be
required to use core.atomic and to consider the correctness of
"This change will require using core.atomic or equivalent
functions to read and write to shared memory objects. It will
prevent unintended, inadvertent non-use of atomic access."
"Since it's just replacing calls to core.atomic with language
support, and atomics are well understood (at least by experts) in
multiple languages, there should be little risk. This is not
pioneering new ground. The only innovation is support by the
language type system rather than library calls."
It's possible that I just don't understand this topic well
enought, but in my opinion it's more of a sketch of things that
should be discussed in a DIP rather than a DIP. An example would
go a long way.
More information about the Digitalmars-d