CP suggestion: use Regular types and Value Semantics

[tvaneerd]

As anyone with experience with Function Programming languages knows, threading is easier when using Value Semantics with Regular types and Regular functions. Since values are always copied, there is no data contention and no need for locks.

This is a one way to achieve "don't share data".

[AndrewPardoe]

Per our editor's discussion, this is a good suggestion, and a good pattern to encourage. Should this be a guideline? Would this rule be sufficiently distinct from CP.3? It is one specific case of CP.3.

Maybe CP.62 "prefer having threads communicate by sending messages containing copies of data". CP.mess, CP.60 & CP61, are there but they don't address this.

@tvaneerd, could you please propose a CP.62? We should use less academic wording than "regular types and value semantics". And maybe avoiding comparisons with Haskell :)