Sharing in D

[JAnderson]

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> "Walter Bright" wrote
>> http://www.reddit.com/comments/6u7k0/sharing_in_d/
> 
> There are 2 problems I see with this scheme.
> 
> First, that the default is 'unshared'.  This is going to break a lot of 
> existing code, and make peoples lives miserable who do not want to deal with 
> unshared non-stack data.  I would hazard to guess that adopting this would 
> cause a larger rift than const.

<Snip>

As far as radical changes to the language breaking existing code, if 
Walter maintained that approach D would never beable to make radical and 
correct improvements (rather then half-work rounds).  We would end up 
with C++.  This is why we have D 1 and 2.  D 2 is still the experimental 
branch.  Yes it makes radical changes however D might never be able to 
provide better multi-threading support if it can't make breaking changes.

My option is that the experimental branch of D should be correct first 
and backwoods compatible second.

Having said that.  I don't think this shared approach should be added to 
the language until const is sorted because that should provide a kinda 
proof of concept for the syntactics of shared memory.

<Snip>

> 
> -Steve 
> 
>