Re: JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?

From: Cliff Click (Cliff.Click@sun.com)
Date: Sat Jan 05 2002 - 00:12:46 EST

Next message: David Holmes: "RE: JavaMemoryModel: Semantics for yield and sleep"
Previous message: Bill Pugh: "Re: JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?"
In reply to: Bill Pugh: "JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?"
Next in thread: Jerry Schwarz: "Re: JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Bill Pugh wrote:

> So, are the JVM implementors happy/content with the idea of dealing an
> additional requirement of handling with classfiles that have
> synchronized <init> methods? Does this cause any issues in the
> implementation?

I don't think HotSpot cares.

Cliff

-------------------------------
JavaMemoryModel mailing list - http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel

Next message: David Holmes: "RE: JavaMemoryModel: Semantics for yield and sleep"
Previous message: Bill Pugh: "Re: JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?"
In reply to: Bill Pugh: "JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?"
Next in thread: Jerry Schwarz: "Re: JavaMemoryModel: Should we allow synchronized constructors?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:00:37 EDT