Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@ignite.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGt6o8nv613NYd_2zL9v=czobrjFSpexnw5i2-k424ssrjp7ow@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAGt6o8nv613NYd_2zL9v=czobrjFSpexnw5i2-k424ssrjp7ow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupitsyn@gridgain.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:19:35 +0300
Message-ID: 
 <CAK2_iMPQTm-a2Kh-wwWUMMuxJ=bKrdy6_XAxA5XCWq1a-PMSUw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Adding compare-and-set method returning value to distributed
 atomics
To: dev@ignite.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e010d9a84fdc8a6051ff14528

--089e010d9a84fdc8a6051ff14528
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi,

Looking at other methods in IgniteAtomicLong, it would be
compareAndSetAndGet. Ugly, but consistent.

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> As we know Java implementation of atomics are rather limited because it
> cannot return current value in case of failed CAS. Other modern platforms
> like .Net, WinAPI and GCC have this feature.
>
> We can easily implement this method because we have old value in hands
> during distributed CAS. But how to name it?
>
> - long compareAndSetValue(long, long)?
> - compareAndSetReturnValue(long, long)?
>
> Please share your ideas.
>
> For examples, GCC goes this way:
> __sync_*bool*_compare_and_set
> __sync_*val*_compare_and_set
>
> Vladimir.
>


-- 
-- 
Pavel Tupitsyn
GridGain Systems, Inc.
www.gridgain.com

--089e010d9a84fdc8a6051ff14528--