[dmd-concurrency] A synchronized storage class?

[Michel Fortin]

I'd like to propose "synchronized" as a storage class to help differentiate variables which are ok to use under a lock from variables intended for lock-free operations. The compiler can then enforce synchronized access to those variables:

	class A {
		synchronized int i;
		synchronized int j;
		shared int k;

		void test1() synchronized {
			++i; // ok: access to i is synchronized
			++j; // ok: access to j is synchronized
			++k; // error: k is shared, not synchronized; supports only atomic ops
			++atomic(k); // ok
		}

		void test2() shared {
			++i; // error: access to i is synchronized, not shared
			++j; // error: access to j is synchronized, not shared
			++k; // error: shared only support atomic operations
			++atomic(k); // ok
		}
	}


-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/