[concurrency-interest] On A Formal Definition of 'Data-Race'

Vitaly Davidovich vitalyd at gmail.com
Tue Apr 16 20:10:32 EDT 2013


Why though? The code works as-is.  String is too high profile (especially
hashing it) to do the "naive" thing.  Also, some architectures pay a
penalty for volatile loads and you'd incur that each time.
On Apr 16, 2013 7:29 PM, "thurstonn" <thurston at nomagicsoftware.com> wrote:

> Come to think of it, why don't the JDK authors declare String#hash as
> volatile?
> Yes, the (generally one-time) write would be more expensive . . .
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://jsr166-concurrency.10961.n7.nabble.com/On-A-Formal-Definition-of-Data-Race-tp9408p9461.html
> Sent from the JSR166 Concurrency mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20130416/f17fe75e/attachment.html>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list