Hi Tobias, On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Tobias Pietzsch wrote:
> We'll have to see what the overhead of the “read-value-again-to-check” > operation is. For the record: synchronization is *always* more expensive than a simple read-value-again check. I am sure that it is relatively easy to use the junit-benchmarks [*1*] to prove that. Ciao, Johannes Footnote *1*: Please note that we forked junit-benchmarks because it requires a relatively ugly fix to work with @Before/@After methods, a fix so ugly that upstream preferred to keep the bug rather than accepting something as Gollum-like. The artifact was already deployed as org.scijava:junit-benchmarks:0.7.3-scijava and it requires an upgrade to JUnit >= 4.11.
_______________________________________________ ImageJ-devel mailing list ImageJ-devel@imagej.net http://imagej.net/mailman/listinfo/imagej-devel
