Low-Lock Singletons In D

[deadalnix]

On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 13:49:14 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
> On Friday, 24 May 2013 at 13:05:36 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>> Max Samukha:
>>
>>> Note that the Nullable is not phobos Nullable -
>>> the latter incurs unnecessary overhead for types that are 
>>> already nullable.
>>
>> In Bugzilla I have suggested some improvements for Nullable, 
>> but in Phobos there is already an alternative Nullable that 
>> avoids that overhead:
>>
>> struct Nullable(T, T nullValue);
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> The question is what should be the result of:
>
> Nullable(int*)?

New type, but no overhead.

> Nullable!(Nullable!T)?
>

New type, with an extra boolean.