Re: JavaMemoryModel: Word tearing

From: Doug Lea (
Date: Thu Jan 03 2002 - 15:22:21 EST

> with funky volatile
> definitions to override it

Not my intent! I should have been more direct about the embedded
question/issue in my post. Which amounts to a corner case:

   Normally (according to proposed JSR-133 semantics) if you share an
   array across threads, you need to make it volatile (or synchronize

   But if you happen to know that no two threads will ever read/write
   to the same array cell, should you still declare it volatile?

My answer is yes.

The answer is motivated by underlying word-tearing issues, but
I think "yes" is a good answer in any case.


JavaMemoryModel mailing list -

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