[concurrency-interest] a volatile bug?

√iktor Ҡlang viktor.klang at gmail.com
Sat May 19 09:29:29 EDT 2012


On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:

> On 05/19/12 09:16, √iktor Ҡlang wrote:
>
>> Wait, what, there's no JMM tests?
>>
>
> There is not, to my knowledge, a "hotspot JMM Test suite"
> (which is out of my scope).


Absolutely, I totally agree, I was just so surprised I almost spilled my
espresso.


>  But there are (three forms of)
> j.u.c test suites, that together test most JMM requirements.
> But there ought to be a separate one to mop up coverage holes.


That's likely the reason it works at all then?

Having run into JVM concurrency bugs it's a bit annoying not to know if
it's my own code, my own test or the JVM which is broken.
Having a cohesive TCK for the JMM would atleast make me blame myself
automatically ;-)

Cheers,
√


>
>
> -Doug
>
>
>


-- 
Viktor Klang

Akka Tech Lead
Typesafe <http://www.typesafe.com/> - The software stack for applications
that scale

Twitter: @viktorklang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20120519/e4a24991/attachment.html>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list