[concurrency-interest] Re: synchronized vs ReentrantLock semantic

Dawid Kurzyniec dawidk at mathcs.emory.edu
Mon Jun 13 22:32:15 EDT 2005


David Holmes wrote:

>I think we (JSR-166 EG) do need to clarify the ReadWriteLock interface
>documentation, because at present while both readLock() and writeLock()
>returns Lock instances - and so have the specified memory model semantics
>relating to lock() and unlock() - what is missing is any statement that the
>two Lock instances act as if they read/write the *same* volatile. 
>
Which will be important not only because it will document the current 
implementation, but also because it will refine and strenghten the 
ReadWriteLock interface contract.

Regards,
Dawid




More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list