On Dec 10, 2010, at 5:08 AM, Doug Lea wrote:
> On 12/09/10 19:09, John Rose wrote:
>> I started a thread on Google Groups to get more advice on safepoint-based
>> invalidation, which the EG is naming MutableCallSite#sync.
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages/browse_thread/thread/9c9
> However, someday, it would be great to be able
> to allow use the same mechanics in each. As parallelism
> becomes more widespread, we must make it easiest and
> most attractive for people to use simpler constrained
> execution control patterns like phasers and FJ rather than the
> ad-hoc unstruc
On 12/09/10 19:09, John Rose wrote:
> I started a thread on Google Groups to get more advice on safepoint-based
> invalidation, which the EG is naming MutableCallSite#sync.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages/browse_thread/thread/9c9d3e84fc745676#
>
TL;DR version: The scheme you laid
