Hi everyone, The questions and suggestions regarding this proposal (JDK-8153111<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153111>) are interesting and useful. We are still digesting the feedback; next week we'll do our best to respond to items raised and add to the discussion. I hope this list captures the main concerns and suggestions seen so far in the discussion:
1. Why not enhance ByteBuffer allocation methods rather that create a new Memory interface 2. Does this proposal buy us anything over exposing special memory as a file mappable via the OS? 3. Possibly more elaborate SPI scheme for memory space creation 4. Provide keyed (e.g. long "slot") allocation of ByteBuffers in a memory space 5. Generic interfaces on Memory (alternate name: BufferSupplier) interface methods 6. Clearer shared / private ByteBuffer semantics within a memory space 7. 64-bit allocation / addressing in Memory interface, at least as prep for a less-restricted ByteBuffer interface 8. Importance of atomics for ByteBuffers (JDK-8008240<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8008240>) and ByteBuffer consistency (JDK-6476827<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6476827>) in the context of this proposal 9. Connection between this proposal and VarHandles Best regards, Steve Dohrmann
