RE: JavaMemoryModel: Guaranteed semantics for Thread.yield()

From: Miles Sabin (
Date: Wed Jan 02 2002 - 14:19:06 EST

Hans Boehm, Hans wrote,
> But I do think that if you replace Thread 1 by
> int i;
> while (x == 0) {
> Thread.sleep(++i);
> }
> The result should terminate. Jerry, do you agree?

If longs were unbounded I would agreed. But they aren't, so any
guarantee here can be no stronger than that for,


But from the point of view of the semantics this should surely be
the same as the guarantee (or lack of it) for Thread.sleep(n) for
any arbitrary long n >= 0. If it isn't, then what's the greatest n
such that the guarantee no longer holds?



Miles Sabin                                     InterX
Internet Systems Architect                      27 Great West Road
+44 (0)20 8817 4030                             Middx, TW8 9AS, UK                     

------------------------------- JavaMemoryModel mailing list -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:00:37 EDT