What classification should shared objects in qeued thread pools have?

[mw]

On Wednesday, 30 September 2020 at 20:13:47 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> This where the memory model of D starts to become confusing for 
> me. By default memory allocations/deallocation are not allowed 
> between threads, however setting the object to shared 
> circumvents this. This seems to work as there is no more aborts 
> from the D memory management. However, this has a weird side

I think declaring the container and item as `shared` is the D's 
encouraged way of sharing data among different threads.

> effect. Now the compiler wants that all my integer member 
> variables operates by using atomic primitives. I don't need 
> this, I know that this object will be sequentially used.

then just cast the `shared` away: cast()data.

> Is shared the wrong way to go here and is there another way to 
> solve this?

I think using `shared` is the D's encouraged way.

If there is a better way do this in D, I'd want to know it too.