<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family:Calibri,"Segoe UI",Meiryo,"Microsoft YaHei UI","Microsoft JhengHei UI","Malgun Gothic","Khmer UI","Nirmala UI",Tunga,"Lao UI",Ebrima,sans-serif;font-size:14.66px">
<div class=" hide-outline"> </div><div class=" hide-outline"><strong>>From:</strong> mta`chrono <<a href="mailto:chrono@mta-international.net">chrono@mta-international.net</a>><br> ><strong>Sent:</strong> Sunday, June 3, 2012 14:38:31<br>
><strong>To:</strong> <a href="mailto:digitalmars-d@puremagic.com">digitalmars-d@puremagic.com</a><br> ><strong>Subject:</strong> Re: synchronized (this[.classinfo]) in druntime and phobos<br>> </div><div>></div>
<div class=" hide-outline">>Am 30.05.2012 11:11, schrieb deadalnix:<br>>> <br>>> D already have much better tools that the one java provide<br>>> (std.concurency, std.parallelism, TLS by default, transitive type<br>
>> qualifiers, . . .) that most these thing taken from java don't make any<br>>> sense now.<br>>> <br>>> For instance, what is the point of being able to lock on any object when<br>>> most of them are thread local ??<br>
> <br>> Right! Locking on non-TLS objects doesn't make sense. Perhaps only<br>> shared objects should be synchronizeable and thus contain a monitor /<br>> pointer to a monitor.<br></div><div><div class=" hide-outline">
auto thingy = new Thing();</div><div class=" hide-outline">auto sthingy = cast(shared)thingy;</div><div class=" hide-outline"> </div><div class=" hide-outline">As long as we support casting to/from shared, you can’t eliminate the monitor pointer in any object.</div>
<div class=" hide-outline"> </div><div class=" hide-outline"> </div><div class=" hide-outline">Sent from my <a href="http://windows.microsoft.com/consumer-preview"><u><font color="#0066cc">Windows 8 PC</font></u></a></div>
</div></div></body></html>