RE: JavaMemoryModel: Reconsidering prioritized InterruptedExceptions

From: Doug Lea (
Date: Fri Nov 28 2003 - 08:47:43 EST

> So I'm arguing that if notify/interrupt reordering is allowed within a
> thread, then the proposed specification change does not fit the bill. What
> should it say instead?

It should suffice to add to the specs for both notify and interrupt:

  The effects of a series of invocations of Object.notify and/or
  Thread.interrupt by a given thread occur in the order in which they
  are invoked.

(Or maybe some less awkward wording.)

This way, the spec for wait can still only add the phrase "for a

Do you see any problems with this?


JavaMemoryModel mailing list -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:00:55 EDT