On Sat, 2005-10-29 at 12:49 -0400, Sandy McArthur wrote:
Since you mentioned not breaking backwards compatibility I started
working on a fresh implementation which I think is coming along very
well and I intend to contribute back to the commons.
sounds good
moving to 2.0 gives a little more
On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 21:05 +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 17:42 -0400, Sandy McArthur wrote:
snip
While I'm at it would it be desirable to transition to the privately
head lock idiom
it might (however) stop a user doing something equivalent through
Since you mentioned not breaking backwards compatibility I started
working on a fresh implementation which I think is coming along very
well and I intend to contribute back to the commons.
I've uploaded JavaDocs of what progress I've made so far. I figure I'm
about 45% done not including unit
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 17:42 -0400, Sandy McArthur wrote:
On 10/24/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unless some one beats me to it, once the patch is available i'll add
myself to the dev list and review (as time permits).
Patches submitted.
committed. many thanks :)
Cool, looking forward to both the release of you tool as well as your
report for commons transaction :)
Cheers and thanks
Oliver
2005/10/25, Mayur Naik [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Oliver,
The tool is still a research prototype but I intend to release it in
the near future. I took a quick look
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 17:56 -0700, Mayur Naik wrote:
Hi Oliver,
The tool is still a research prototype but I intend to release it in
the near future.
cool
please drop us a note here when you do :)
- robert
-
To
On 10/23/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are there any pool developers out there with time to pick this up?
otherwise, we could probably do with a volunteer to go through and
analyse these issues. anyone fancy taking a crack at this?
I'm not a pool dev but I'll make some
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 14:32 -0400, Sandy McArthur wrote:
On 10/23/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are there any pool developers out there with time to pick this up?
otherwise, we could probably do with a volunteer to go through and
analyse these issues. anyone fancy
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 22:11 +0100, sebb wrote:
On 23/10/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 14:56 +0100, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
This looks interesting. I'll leave the pool comments to a pool
developer. However, could adding a lot more
On 24/10/05, Sandy McArthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/23/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are there any pool developers out there with time to pick this up?
otherwise, we could probably do with a volunteer to go through and
analyse these issues. anyone fancy taking
On 10/24/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unless some one beats me to it, once the patch is available i'll add
myself to the dev list and review (as time permits).
Patches submitted.
While I'm at it would it be desirable to transition to the privately
head lock idiom
it
Hi Oliver,
The tool is still a research prototype but I intend to release it in
the near future. I took a quick look and it seems like my tool might
not be very useful on the commons transaction code because that code
uses sophisticated locking primitives which the current version of my
tool
Hello,
I'm a PhD student in Computer Science at Stanford University,
evaluating a static race detection tool I'm developing on open source
Java programs. I ran it on the 5 implementations of pools in Apache
Commons Pool, and found some bugs. The output of the tool is here:
This looks interesting. I'll leave the pool comments to a pool
developer. However, could adding a lot more synchronoization could cause
other issues with locking and performance?
My main question is can these tests be run against any class? We're
particularly stuck with
On 23/10/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My main question is can these tests be run against any class? We're
particularly stuck with
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32573 collections
LRUMap at present where a bug can easily be reproduced when you don't
sync,
Hello,
I'm a PhD student in Computer Science at Stanford University, evaluating a
static race detection tool I'm developing on open source Java programs.
I ran it on the 5 implementations of pools in Apache Commons Pool, and
found some bugs. The output of the tool is here:
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 04:12 -0700, Mayur Naik wrote:
Hello,
I'm a PhD student in Computer Science at Stanford University,
evaluating a static race detection tool I'm developing on open source
Java programs.
an open source static race detector? if so, then it sounds very cool :)
if you
Hi Mayur,
that really sounds like a cool tool. You results are also quite
impressive. I actually can not comment on them, but would like to know
if your tool is available anywhere?
If not - and I suppose so - could you also run it on the commons
transaction code where any race condition really
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 14:56 +0100, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
This looks interesting. I'll leave the pool comments to a pool
developer. However, could adding a lot more synchronoization could cause
other issues with locking and performance?
probably. however, IMHO an object pool really needs
On 23/10/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 14:56 +0100, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
This looks interesting. I'll leave the pool comments to a pool
developer. However, could adding a lot more synchronoization could cause
other issues with locking and
20 matches
Mail list logo
