Re: Concurrent Hash Map javadoc question

David Holmes via Concurrency-interest <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.java.jsr.166-concurrency
Organization Oracle Corporation
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Please drop the discuss@openjdk list from this exchange - thanks.

David

On 18/09/2019 12:19 pm, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> How about
> The entire method invocation is performed atomically, so the function is
> applied at most once per key.
> =>
> The entire method invocation is performed atomically.  The function is
> applied at most once per key.
> 
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 7:08 PM Benjamin Manes <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> All three state that "The entire method invocation is performed
>> atomically" and computeIfAbsent merely explains this with the addition "so
>> the function is applied at most once per key." Since all computations are
>> atomic operations in ConcurrentHashMap, this seems to be implied in the
>> other cases rather than explicitly clarified.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 6:36 PM Martin Buchholz via Concurrency-interest <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I think this doc difference is intentional.
>>>
>>> In case of a retry loop, the value may have changed in the case of
>>> computeIfPresent or compute and so the function must be called again with
>>> the new value.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:36 PM Martijn Verburg <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Keith,
>>>>
>>>> I think this is one for concurrency interest to answer.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 12:48, Keith Turner <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The javadoc for ConcurrentHashMap.computeIfAbsent() states the
>>>>> remapping function is applied at most once.  The functions
>>>>> computeIfPresent() and compute() do not explicitly state if the
>>>>> remapping functions could possibly be run multiple times. Does anyone
>>>>> know if computeIfPresent() and compute() are guaranteed to only run
>>>>> the remapping functions at most once?  If so, should the javadoc be
>>>>> updated?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Concurrency-interest mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Concurrency-interest mailing list
[email protected]
http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.