Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- From: Lew <lew@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
On Jul 31, 2:49 pm, Robert Klemme <shortcut...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 31.07.2008 15:19, Lew wrote:
Philipp wrote:
Btw, AFAIK the implementation you are using preceded Java 5 so it is not
a backport.
Q2: Does it make a difference if you are in the 1.4 or java [sic] 5
memory model?
Yes, but not to this snippet.
Are you sure with regard to "volatile"? I faintly remember articles
about the flaws of the Java memory model before Java 5 and I believe
volatile handling was one of them. Or am I mixing up something?
You are correct, but 'volatile' was not used in the snippet, so that
difference is, as stated, not relevant to the snippet.
--
Lew
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- From: Robert Klemme
- Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- References:
- ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- From: Philipp
- Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- From: Lew
- Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- From: Robert Klemme
- ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- Prev by Date: Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- Next by Date: Re: Connecting Via HTTPS
- Previous by thread: Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- Next by thread: Re: ThreadPoolExecutor backport
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|