[concurrency-interest] Language extensions for java.util.concurrent?

Doug Lea dl at cs.oswego.edu
Fri Nov 11 10:37:55 EST 2005


Chris Purcell wrote:
> Just to note,
> 
>>   1. They contain well-defined read-sets and write-sets
> 
> 
> *Dynamically determined* read-sets and write-sets, if you use the 
> current state-of-the-art. I'm not sure what you mean by "well-defined".

Thanks. To try to stay uncontroversial, I prefaced this with

>> cases in which database-style transactions tend to work best: 

not, "work at all". Stretching this as far as possible in language-based
transactions is a good idea. But the possibilities of say, virtual
calls to objects of non-yet-loaded classes can make it fairly challenging.

-Doug


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list