That would be the case, if it can assume access is single-threaded.
Alex
> On 26 Oct 2015, at 11:56, Justin Sampson <jsamp...@guidewire.com> wrote:
>
> Alex Otenko wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it be possible to add a test that will always be false?
>>
>> eg
>> [...]
>> if (get() != referent) {
>> [...]
>>
>> The point being that referent would need to stay alive due to
>> Java semantics to align with get() and queue assignment.
>
> Couldn't the compiler just inline get() as this.referent, see that
> this.referent was just set to referent, and simplify this.referent
> != referent to false?
>
> Cheers,
> Justin
