Re: JMM- conservative and formal point of view.

Aleksey, thanks for your explanation. By the way, your presentation (I mean slides) is great- when it comes to the content and not only :-). W dniu środa, 16 maja 2018 19:33:22 UTC+2 użytkownik John Hening napisał: > > The following picture comes from: >

Re: JMM- conservative and formal point of view.

On 05/16/2018 09:19 PM, John Hening wrote: > By the way, in your transcription you said: > | >     inta; > >     volatilebooleanready =false; > >     voidactor(IntResult1r){ >         while(!ready){}; >         r.r1 =a; >     } > >     voidobserver(){ >         a =41; >         a =42; >        

Re: JMM- conservative and formal point of view.

> Subject: JMM- conservative and formal point of view. > > There is no "conservative" JMM point of view. There is JSR 133 Cookbook > for Compiler Writers that > describes the conservative implementation, but it is not the JMM itself. > Reductio ad absurdum: > suppos

Re: JMM- conservative and formal point of view.

On 05/16/2018 07:33 PM, John Hening wrote: > Subject: JMM- conservative and formal point of view. There is no "conservative" JMM point of view. There is JSR 133 Cookbook for Compiler Writers that describes the conservative implementation, but it is not the JMM itself. Reducti

JMM- conservative and formal point of view.

The following picture comes from: https://shipilev.net/blog/2014/jmm-pragmatics/ As I understand this slide points that JMM does not constitute that a volatile write does not work as a (Load/Store)Store barrier, and it doesn't in