On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 21:23:12 +0100, Kevin Wright
<kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> wrote:
Agreed, shared mutable state is generally a PITA. Then again, it can
occasionally be very valuable if correctly used and controlled.
Case in point, the disruptor pattern achieves some amazing performance
metrics through use of shared mutable state, as do certain lock-free
algorithms and software transactional memory.
Are these solutions that we want to categorically rule out of a
programming
language?
Not by chance I wrote "I'd appreciate some care", rather than say that I
don't want to see it supported. Clearly, it's ok when experienced people
use it for writing the Disruptor or such, while I'd appreciate something
that prevented a direct use, not mediated by a "trusted" library.
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it
http://tidalwave.it - http://fabriziogiudici.it
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java
Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
