On Mar 10, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Martin Buchholz <marti...@google.com> wrote:
> I agree with Andrew that the Unsafe API matters, and there are many > implementations of it (even multiple within openjdk itself!). > > I still know of no reason why my proposed spec is wrong. If C11 support was > good and ubiquitous, I would recommend using atomic_compare_exchange_strong > or C++ equivalent in the hotspot implementation instead of fences as is done > now. > > If you think you can write a better spec, please share! I am all for clearing up the language here, but think it prudent to hold off doing much until the language for JMM revisions and VarHandle is produced, then we can revisit. Paul.
