In message <aanlktinst2afvdlxxn8767i9nnj5jhqazxmsbmnjt...@mail.gmail.com>, Jesse Wilson writes: > > On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 8:05 PM, <regi...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Mark Hindess <mark.hind...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > > > This breaks the build for the IBM VME (from developerWorks). Since > > they don't have a sun.misc.Unsafe, so the AtomicInteger can't be > > resolved. > > If VME is to stay modern, they're going to need to support > java.util.concurrent. I don't think Harmony should provide a > lowest-common-denominator class library; supporting systems that don't > have j.u.c is an unnecessary handicap.
For what it is worth, I agree. I was not necessarily anticipating the change being reverted. I would not be unhappy with our breaking the obsolete VME. My main purpose in sending my mail was to make sure we did it knowingly with good reason rather than inadvertently because we weren't paying attention. > Particularly since they can implement AtomicInteger using > less efficient concurrency primitives. There's even a full > backport<http://backport-jsr166.sourceforge.net/>that could close some > gaps if the standard java.util.concurrent isn't feasible for their VM. Useful reference. Thanks. Regards, Mark.
