Sorry.. I should have clarified:
> BTW, One relevant difference between Java and some other languages is
> that opportunities to prove lack of accessibility across multiple
> threads are far less common. This is due to, among other things,
> dynamic loading, reflection, and use of container frameworks. Thus it
> is the normal, not exceptional, practice to assume that an object may
> be accessed across threads. (You might not like this aspect of Java,
> but it doesn't seem fair to subvert it.)
To say what I meant:
BTW, One relevant difference between Java and some other languages is
that opportunities to prove, *at design time*, lack of accessibility
across multiple threads are far less common. Hoever, there are
proportionally many more opportunities that can be determined *at run
time*.
-- Doug Lea, Computer Science Department, SUNY Oswego, Oswego, NY 13126 USA dl@cs.oswego.edu 315-341-2688 FAX:315-341-5424 http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/ ------------------------------- This is the JavaMemoryModel mailing list, managed by Majordomo 1.94.4.To send a message to the list, email JavaMemoryModel@cs.umd.edu To send a request to the list, email majordomo@cs.umd.edu and put your request in the body of the message (use the request "help" for help). For more information, visit http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:00:13 EDT