On Monday, 16 January 2017 12:38:01 UTC-5, Francesco Nigro wrote: > > I'm missing something for sure, because if it was true, any > (single-threaded) "protocol" that rely on the order of writes/loads against > (not mapped) ByteBuffers to be fast (ie: sequential writes rocks :P) risks > to not see the order respected if not using patterns that force the > compiler to block the re-ordering of such instructions (Sci-Fi hypothesis). >
I don't think you're missing anything. The JVM would be stupid to reorder your sequential writes into random writes, but it's perfectly within its right to do so for a single-threaded program according to the JMM, as long as it respects data dependencies (AFAIK). Of course, that would be a huge quality of implementation issue, but that's an entirely separate class from correctness issues. > with great regards, > Francesco > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
