# \[Second Review\] SE-0371: Isolated synchronous deinit

**URL:** <https://forums.swift.org/t/second-review-se-0371-isolated-synchronous-deinit/73406>\
**Category:** Proposal Reviews\
**Tags:** concurrency\
**Created:** [July 24, 2024, 2:12am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/second-review-se-0371-isolated-synchronous-deinit/73406 "2024-07-24T02:12:13Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 11

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![vns](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/swift/user_avatar/forums.swift.org/vns/32/37396_2.png) [@vns](https://forums.swift.org/u/vns)\
**Post date:** [July 24, 2024, 3:02pm UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/second-review-se-0371-isolated-synchronous-deinit/73406/11 "2024-07-24T15:02:40Z")

</div>

From reading the proposal, previous thread and along-side thread an task locals, I have an impression that `deinit async` (and I see in previous review also [were "votes" for it](https://forums.swift.org/t/se-0371-isolated-synchronous-deinit/59754/10)), or any other explicit mark (`isolated(unsafe)`? makes not a lot of sense though) that this change will make an effect on how deterministicaly `deinit` is executed. IMO `isolated` in that case has less expressivity over `async`, but latter brings also the need to support other asynchoronous operations, which might be too much.

I also support [this take on importance of documenting](https://forums.swift.org/t/sub-pitch-task-local-values-in-isolated-synchronous-deinit-and-async-deinit/70060/30), as it might be not clear (especially to newcomers to the language) to understand why this feature exists and what aims to address.

* * *

Aside from that, +1.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.swift.org/t/second-review-se-0371-isolated-synchronous-deinit/73406)._