On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 4:52 PM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote:
> For the email record, as I have written in the bug report, I think the > "correction" of the semantics for storeFence have resulted in problematic > naming where storeFence and loadFence have opposite directionality > constraints but the names suggest the same directionality constraints. Had > the original API suggested these names with the revised semantics I would > have argued against them. This area is confusing enough without adding to > that confusion with names that don't suggest the action. I also dislike the names of the "atomic" methods in Unsafe and would like to align them as much as possible with C/C++ 11 atomics nomenclature.
