[concurrency-interest] Transactional memory on GCC 4.7.0, what about Java?
forax at univ-mlv.fr
Mon Nov 21 17:03:31 EST 2011
On 11/21/2011 08:04 PM, Guy Korland wrote:
> Not all the issues are solved, but it seems like most of the issues
> have good answers.
> Also, notice that in .NET they have issues which Java doesn't have
> like Native code and pointers in C++.
And how do you solve the IO problems (when you retry) ?
Also the semantics chosen by Microsoft when an exception is thrown
and the one chosen by GCC is not the same.
> > Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:21:23 +0000?
> > From: Mark Thornton <mthornton at optrak.com
> <mailto:mthornton at optrak.com>>
> > To: concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> <mailto:concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [concurrency-interest] Transactional memory on GCC
> > what about Java?
> > Message-ID: <4EC77513.5040807 at optrak.com
> <mailto:4EC77513.5040807 at optrak.com>>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
> > On 19/11/11 07:00, Guy Korland wrote:
> >> Hardware support might be great but it seems like it won't be
> >> generally available in the near future, while STM is becoming,
> >> widely available see Scala, Intel C++, and GCC 4.7... I think this
> >> process should start in Java also.
> >> Regards,
> >> Guy Korland
> > Yet Microsoft abandoned STM.net after 6 years development.
> > Have the issues changed or the has the focus been narrowed to
> > which is achievable?
> > Mark Thornton
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest