eg:5 individuals in the first round of written exams,ending with a ranking
based on everyone's score points; and a second round of interviews, with a
ranking based on the average of the three interviewers' scores;The two rounds
of ranking methods are the barrierCommand, and they are different
-
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> eg:5 individuals in the first round of written exams,ending with a ranking
> based on everyone's score points; and a second round of interviews, with a
> ranking based on the average of the three interviewers' scores;The two rounds
> of ran
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> eg:5 individuals in the first round of written exams,ending with a ranking
> based on everyone's score points; and a second round of interviews, with a
> ranking based on the average of the three interviewers' scores;The two rounds
> of ran
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
> For example, the U.S.
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
> For example, the U.S.
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:02:12 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> Hi Can anyone help me to review this PR @sormuras @asotona or any other
> reviewer?
I think you first need to make a case for changing the CyclicBarrier API as
opposed to dealing with the phases in your BarrierAction or using the Phaser
AP
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 13:20:15 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > Hi Can anyone help me to review this PR @sormuras @asotona or any other
> > reviewer?
>
> I think you first need to make a case for changing the CyclicBarrier API as
> opposed to dealing with the phases in your BarrierAction or using th
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
> For example, the U.S.
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:59:29 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
>> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
>> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
>> For example, th
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
> For example, the U.S.
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:02:45 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
>> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
>> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
>> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
>> For example, the
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 02:33:05 GMT, chenggwang wrote:
> Sorry, my description in Issue JDK-8314194(which I submitted) is ambiguous
> and makes you think of Phaser. My intention is that each generation of
> CyclicBarrier barrierCommand can change. Let me give you a scenario
> For example, the U.S.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:11:56 GMT, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> We should try to retain designed immutability in concurrency classes. Having
> had the experience of having fixed many bugs with knobs tunable at runtime.
> If you make a field mutable, you need to think not just about "set", but also
13 matches
Mail list logo
