[concurrency-interest] AtomicReference.updateAndGet() mandatory updating?
martinrb at google.com
Mon Jun 5 21:59:11 EDT 2017
I'm still hoping for a failed CAS to NOT be equivalent to a volatile write,
but instead a volatile read, as in C++.
For low-level lock-free linked list manipulating code
(LinkedTransferQueue), I would not use updateAndGet but instead write my
own CAS loops.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest