Hi Roger,
I looked at Martin's idea and I think that we don't need the
AsyncExecutor at all (it already sounds like I hate it ;-). Using
ManagedBlocker, a ForkJoinPoll can compensate and grow it's pool as
needed when Process.waitFor() blocks. So we could leverage this feature
and simplify things even further:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-sandbox/JDK-8046092-branch/webrev.03/
Passing a commonPool() to xxxAsync() methods is unneeded as the default
is exactly the same. If CompletableFuture ever gets a feature to specify
a default Executor for all it's descendants, then we can revisit this if
needed.
What do you think?
Regards, Peter
On 05/19/2015 10:15 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
The webrev, javadoc, and specdiffs have been updated to address recent
recommendations:
Please review and comment:
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-ph/ (May 19)
javadoc:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/ph-apidraft/ (May 19)
Diffs of the spec/javadoc from previous draft:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/ph-diffs-2015-05-19/overview-summary.html
Thanks, Roger
