Looks OK assuming the CCC is approved On Jan 20, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Hi > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8032513-Spliterator-immutable-concurrent/webrev/ > > This is really just a clarification making what was implicitly obvious > explicitly so. > > I will file a CCC. > > Paul. > > diff -r ff20291021b3 src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Spliterator.java > --- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Spliterator.java Tue Jan 20 > 16:19:16 2015 +0000 > +++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Spliterator.java Tue Jan 20 > 16:23:23 2015 +0000 > @@ -553,6 +553,12 @@ > * sub-split size is known and additions or removals to the source are not > * reflected when traversing. > * > + * <p>A top-level Spliterator should not report both {@code CONCURRENT} > and > + * {@code IMMUTABLE}, since they are mutually exclusive. Such a > Spliterator > + * is inconsistent and no guarantees can be made about any computation > using > + * that Spliterator. Sub-spliterators may report {@code IMMUTABLE} if > + * additions or removals to the source are not reflected when traversing. > + * > * @apiNote Most concurrent collections maintain a consistency policy > * guaranteeing accuracy with respect to elements present at the point of > * Spliterator construction, but possibly not reflecting subsequent > Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 lance.ander...@oracle.com
