On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 05:10:29 +0100, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote:
So... When looking toward Java 8, "catching up in some areas" would be
a fair assessment?
Anyone have any thoughts on:
http://java.dzone.com/articles/think-twice-using-java-8
and the linked:
http://coopsoft.com/ar/Calamity2Article.html
Looks like parallel streams in Java8/ForkJoin are broken by design - at
least with the streams API as they force you to use a common
ForkJoinPool which defaults to a limited number of threads - for the
entire JVM..... seems a little limiting....
Unless I'm missing something...
I didn't play much with streams so far, and I missed that post (I had
serious troubles with my two Apple laptops in the past ten days and I have
accumulated a large queue of posts to read...). But actually I was curious
about why you can use the plain ForkJoin API by specifying an explicit
ThreadFactory (I agree, it's an advisable thing to have a separate pool
for each task) and this is not possible with parallel(). Is there an
official word by the API designers? Is it just something that can be added
with an overloaded method parallel(...) or is there a deeper design
problem behind it?
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect @ Tidalwave s.a.s.
"We make Java work. Everywhere."
http://tidalwave.it/fabrizio/blog - fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java
Posse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
