Difference between __gshared and shared.

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 8 July 2015 at 18:05:13 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> I definetly seen synchronized classes in TDPL years ago. They 
> ought to work today or am I missing something?

They're described in TDPL, but they've never been implemented. 
Instead, we have synchronized functions like in Java (which TDPL 
specifically talks about being a bad idea). With a synchronized 
class, _all_ functions in a class would be synchronized, and a 
variety of restrictions are placed on the class so that it can 
make implicitly remove the outer layed or shared on its member 
variables inside its member functions. With synchronized 
functions, all they do is lock when you enter them an unlock when 
you exit them and share the mutex with the other synchronized 
functions in the class, but they add no other abilities or 
guarantees.

So, arguably, we should implement synchronized classes as 
described in TDPL, and that would certainly help with the shared 
situation, but for whatever reason, no one has ever implemented 
them.

- Jonathan M Davis