There's no real need to use a shared pointer in these cases, and only
makes object management more fragile in terms of how easy it would be to
introduce cycles. Instead, just do the simple thing of using a regular
pointer. Much of this is just a hold-over from citra anyways.
It also doesn't make sense from a behavioral point of view for a
process' thread to prolong the lifetime of the process itself (the
process is supposed to own the thread, not the other way around).
Many of the member variables of the thread class aren't even used
outside of the class itself, so there's no need to make those variables
public. This change follows in the steps of the previous changes that
made other kernel types' members private.
The main motivation behind this is that the Thread class will likely
change in the future as emulation becomes more accurate, and letting
random bits of the emulator access data members of the Thread class
directly makes it a pain to shuffle around and/or modify internals.
Having all data members public like this also makes it difficult to
reason about certain bits of behavior without first verifying what parts
of the core actually use them.
Everything being public also generally follows the tendency for changes
to be introduced in completely different translation units that would
otherwise be better introduced as an addition to the Thread class'
public interface.
Makes the public interface consistent in terms of how accesses are done
on a process object. It also makes it slightly nicer to reason about the
logic of the process class, as we don't want to expose everything to
external code.
Zach Hilman