[concurrency-interest] JCiP Memoizer
the.mindstorm.mailinglist at gmail.com
Wed Oct 18 07:42:51 EDT 2006
On 10/18/06, Joe Bowbeer <joe.bowbeer at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the existing cancellation exception handling would make more
> sense if the task were submitted to an executor. Then a forced
> shutdown of the executor, for example, could cause a cancellation
> Btw, when I've coded this kind of thing in the past, I've usually
> finessed the problem by adding "throws Exception" to the method in
> question :-)
He he... in my case I must have no throws :-).
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
> On 10/18/06, David Holmes <dcholmes at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > Alex,
> > I have to concur with Tim. The intent was that interruption during ft.run()
> > implied cancellation and so there was a need to do clean-up of the cache
> > entry. But there is nothing to convert the interruption to a cancel()
> > request and so all that happens in the current case is that everyone who
> > calls f.get() will get ExecutionException with a cause of
> > InterruptedException.
> > [...]
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at altair.cs.oswego.edu
More information about the Concurrency-interest