[concurrency-interest] CHM.compute restrictions

Grzegorz Piwowarek gpiwowarek at gmail.com
Tue Aug 7 16:42:28 EDT 2018


They do - but there’s no contract enforcing that - that’s just an implementation trick and you should not rely on that

> On 07 Aug 2018, at 18:28, Jonas Konrad via Concurrency-interest <concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:
> 
> Shouldn't streams use the current FJP when executed inside one? As in, if the current thread is a ForkJoinWorkerThread, it'll use that thread's pool.
> 
> - Jonas
> 
> On 08/07/2018 06:19 PM, Peter Levart via Concurrency-interest wrote:
>> On 08/07/2018 06:12 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
>>> To avoid that, outer and inner tasks should not share the same ForkJoinPool.
>> But Stream(s) are currently not designed to work with anything else than default ForkJoinPool.
>> Would it make sense to extend the Stream API with an overloaded method like:
>> Stream.parallel(ForkJoinPool) ?
>> Regards, Peter
>> _______________________________________________
>> Concurrency-interest mailing list
>> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
>> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest



More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list