Could D be used by Jonathan Blow rather jai language?
bcarneal at gmail.com
Sat Nov 21 05:51:53 UTC 2020
On Saturday, 21 November 2020 at 02:42:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
> On Saturday, 21 November 2020 at 01:52:36 UTC, Bruce Carneal
>> If "it", whatever that is, precludes safe parallelism in
>> libraries or language extensions then "it" should be removed
>> from the language.
>> Again, defaults really matter here. If the right way is the
>> default way then leaving the "wrong" way escape hatch costs
>> less, in my view, than forcing two or more languages.
> Well, @safe just means memory safe, not sure if it is meant to
> also cover multi threading safety?
> The guarantees are not very clear to me.
I've only read about @safe referring to the memory safety that
> It is also not clear what happens if you allocated something as
> shared, cast away shared and the call free(). Are you allowed
> to have two separate heaps?
I don't have a comprehensive understanding of where D is at and
where it is headed wrt memory safety models. The @live stuff
looks a little "iffy". Hopefully Walter's upcoming talk will
> It is unclear if D programmers follow the same principles or
> just rely on testing with the current runtime. If it is the
> latter then it will be difficult to get clean nonbreaking
As you note, some language advances may not be practical for D
but others could be built atop extant automated/correct checking
and some could be independent, never-existed-before, capabilities
where backward compatibility is not a concern: type functions,
monadic type variables, new memory guarantees, arbitrarily
prolonged "compile time", ...
More information about the Digitalmars-d