hanson.char at gmail.com
Thu May 3 12:41:22 EDT 2007
There is minor typo in the javadoc:
"Memory consistency effects: As with other concurrent collections, actions
in a thread prior to placing an object into a ConcurrentLinkedQueue *
subsequent to the access or removal of that element from the
ConcurrentLinkedQueue in another thread."
I suppose it means to refer to LinkedTransferQueue instead of
On 5/3/07, Hanson Char <hanson.char at gmail.com> wrote:
> Nice :)
> "...TransferQueue may be capacity bounded", as said in the javadoc,
> whereas LinkedTransferQueue is unbounded. Is there any plan to include an
> optionally-bounded TransferQueue impl in Java 7 ? If so, what would the
> name be like ? Should the naming convention be made parallel/consistent
> against the existing LinkedBlockingQueue (which is optionally bounded) ?
> Hanson Char
> On 5/3/07, Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:
> > Hanson Char wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Is there a CVS access to the source of the latest Java Fork/Join
> > > Framework ? Is it part of jsr166y (which currently seems to have an
> > > empty source tree) ? Will the framework be made available in Java 7 ?
> > >
> > Coming soon. There are a couple of further pieces I need to get
> > together before public preliminary release. In the mean time,
> > if you are curious, snapshots of javadocs can be found at
> > http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/jsr166/dist/jsr166ydocs/
> > Comments and suggestions would be welcome.
> > Yes, we hope the forkjoin package gets put into Java 7.
> > -Doug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest