D1.5 anyone?

[Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole]

On 14/04/2023 7:38 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/12/2023 10:50 PM, Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole wrote:
>> We can talk about this some other time perhaps at a BeerConf if you're 
>> on when I can talk. I do have a lot of things to talk about that are a 
>> bit exciting (and plenty of bugs like unresolved RTInfoImpl's with dmd)!
> 
> Ok. But I suggest writing down your thoughts, complete with examples and 
> such. I have a hard time picturing just what your proposal is.

- Remove ``shared(T)``
- Add ``atomic(T)`` so that ``a++;`` works, rather than a failure mode 
(like -preview=nosharedaccess introduces, or having to cast away shared).

Basically everything I have to say is rather academic in nature, not 
very practical, there are arguments both for and against everything 
practical I can suggest.

 From my reading of research papers regarding coroutines, pretty much 
all the concurrency primitives that we know of today for PL design was 
already invented by 1976 with an implementation; this is very much an 
open problem still.

I really enjoyed this particular passage from one paper as it shows just 
how little things have changed in 50 years:

 > However, this paper also ignores many serious problems. The most 
serious is that it fails to suggest any proof method to assist in the 
development and verification of correct programs.