On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:58:34 -0400, Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh@gmail.com> wrote:

07-May-2013 17:25, Andrei Alexandrescu пишет:

No. A tutorial on memory consistency models would be too long to insert
here. I don't know of a good online resource, does anyone?

Sutter's Mill is a good starting point even though it's C++ biased.

Two recent insightful talks on C++11 memory model with down and dirty details:

http://herbsutter.com/2013/02/11/atomic-weapons-the-c-memory-model-and-modern-hardware/

I finally got around to watching this.  Absolutely mind-blowing, and a very very good talk.  This is what I would point people at, although it is a bit long (and necessarily so).  Didn't seem like it took 3 hours :)

I take back all my arguments regarding the previous discussion, they were all wrong, along with my concept of the "issues" with out-of-order reads/writes.  I really like how Herb explains that it doesn't really matter where the re-ordering happens, to the coder, it's all the same (as if the source code is reordered), and how you can't ever really reason about code if it has races.

Is D prepared to do (or does it do?) the same things that C/C++11 does with atomics?  It seems it is a necessity.  The docs on core.atomic are, well, actually missing: http://dlang.org/phobos/core_atomic.html

-Steve