RFR 8005704: Update ConcurrentHashMap to v8 (original) (raw)

Peter Levart peter.levart at gmail.com
Wed May 29 14:28:42 UTC 2013

On 05/29/2013 04:07 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote:

... and the links to the updated spedcdiff / webrev

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8005704/ver.01/specdiff/java/util/concurrent/package-summary.html http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8005704/ver.01/webrev/ -Chris. On 29/05/2013 15:06, Chris Hegarty wrote: Mike, Doug,

On 28/05/2013 20:07, Mike Duigou wrote: Hi Chris& Doug;

- I don't feel strongly about the removal of AbstractMap. I don't see this as very likely to cause problems in real world code though there is probably some test code somewhere that assigns CHM to an AbstractMap. I don't feel strongly about this either, but I think it deserves possibly its own bug number and consideration. I have removed it from this review request, and will a file a new bug to track it.

Hi,

Why not using Unsafe (which is already used in CHM) to re-use the AbstractMap.keySet/values fields? They could even be accessed with normal non-volatile read/write although they are declared volatile in AbstractMap. Is this to "hacky"?

Regards, Peter

- I am reluctant to deprecate contains(Object) here unless we deprecate it in Hashtable as well. I recognize that this has been a source of errors (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/showbug.cgi?id=48755 for one example). Is it time to deprecate it there as well? Dito for this, removed from this request and should be revisited separately. -Chris.

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list