On Saturday, October 22, 2011 12:43:17 AM UTC-4, Cédric Beust ♔ wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM, opinali <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Now you come to us and tell that FJ, which is basically the next chapter >> of the same book, written by the same authors and basically in the same >> style, is some piece of junk. Oh and by the way you authored a competing >> book. > > > He also authored a competing framework, which he recommends as the only > alternative to Fork/Join at the end of his article. >
Well, above I was using "book" as a metaphor for "framework" :) but it's also nice to remember JCIP, which is *THE* modern book about applied/practical concurrent programming - if anybody says that book is also "academic", it's crazy talk. The single serious criticism I've ever heard about j.u.c. and the continuing work of JSR-166, is that it furthers the paradigm of shared-memory concurrency. But, like it or not, it's the appropriate thing to do at the level of the JavaSE platform and Java Language. Then you can use these as [extremely good] building blocks for higher-level languages and concurrency frameworks, like Scala+Actors etc. And j.u.c. is well designed to accommodate future innovation at the runtime or language levels - from Java syntax sugar a la C# 5, to lambdas, coroutines, affinnity..., all these things will be easy to fit, indeed they have been considered in the design. A+ Osvaldo -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/6PGNmlmj_swJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
