On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote:
> > I think that would be too pedantic as well. At this late stage in 9 i > prefer to leave things as they are and not fiddle. Revise for 10? > We could, but jsr166 primitive version control technology doesn't have a mechanism to maintain such distinctions. I still think the jdk9 docs are misleading and we should do something to fix them. The high-level bit for users is "Bulk operations are non-atomic"! Maybe we should include that sentence?!
