Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-river-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-river-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EF98102CF for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 08:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 54491 invoked by uid 500); 21 Dec 2013 08:51:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-river-dev-archive@river.apache.org Received: (qmail 54445 invoked by uid 500); 21 Dec 2013 08:51:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@river.apache.org Received: (qmail 54422 invoked by uid 99); 21 Dec 2013 08:51:18 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 08:51:18 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [207.57.65.70] (HELO zeus.net.au) (207.57.65.70) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 08:51:11 +0000 Received: (qmail 17223 invoked by uid 16710); 21 Dec 2013 08:50:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO [10.46.54.213]) (jini@[49.181.184.219]) (envelope-sender ) by 207.57.65.70 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 21 Dec 2013 08:50:49 -0000 Message-ID: <52B5566A.9020001@zeus.net.au> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 18:50:50 +1000 From: Peter Firmstone User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120306 Thunderbird/3.1.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: VOTE: add Startable to Jini specification References: <1387274583.7396.13.camel@Nokia-N900> <1387361916.10544.5.camel@Nokia-N900> <52B1811E.3020909@acm.org> <1387366936.10790.16.camel@Nokia-N900> <1387370542.10790.28.camel@Nokia-N900> <1387379542.10790.62.camel@Nokia-N900> <1387413765.11482.5.camel@Nokia-N900> <6C1CA208-98BF-415F-8F65-A4D6800E39E8@stratuscom.com> <1387498686.13390.6.camel@Nokia-N900> <1387504487.13767.5.camel@Nokia-N900> <47E98176-3F2B-43B6-831B-5F45E5D821AD@stratuscom.com> <1387514976.13913.5.camel@Nokia-N900> <52B48E89.2030604@acm.org> <1387579080.15184.5.camel@Nokia-N900> <1387585725.1425.6.camel@Nokia-N900> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I think the real problem is some people haven't been reading up on concurrency and are insufficiently informed to be able to properly discuss the issue. When I don't know something, I either ask someone who does, or I keep my mouth shut so as not to look like a fool. It's more a case of, if you behave like a fool long enough to make it frustrating, that's exactly how you'll be treated. Sadly it's by people who should know better, who while they may lack an understanding of the JMM are still very skilled programmers, that's what makes it frustrating. Final fields are made visible after construction completes, so when other threads receive a copy of the object in an unconstructed state, like they do during export in a constructor, then those threads can continue to see the incomplete object, rather than the fully constructed one. See for yourselves, look at all the final fields in Mercury, then realise that it's reference escaped during construction. The other services are also guilty. That also means that all the remote method invocations wrapped up as runnable tasks and executed on Mercury's methods in an executor pool will have also seen parts of Mercury in a partially constructed state. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/river/jtsk/skunk/qa_refactor/trunk/src/com/sun/jini/mercury/MailboxImpl.java?r1=545310&r2=1552606 If I haven't convinced you, read up, spend some time on the concurrency interest mail list or ask someone you trust who does know. Regards, Peter. On 21/12/2013 11:10 AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: > (off-list) > > Peter: > > You�re sounding unprofessional, and you�re missing the fact that people are giving reasonable and well-thought-out feedback. You seem to be taking the conversation personally. Perhaps you should take a few hours off the list and cool down. Things will still be here when you�ve regained composure. > > Best regards, > > Greg. > > On Dec 20, 2013, at 7:28 PM, Peter wrote: > >> You just did. >> >> The blue pill. >> >> I prefer the truth, it's easier in the long run. >> >> Feel free to cast your vote. >> >> Peter. >> >> ----- Original message ----- >>> Peter, >>> >>> There's so many things wrong in there, I'm not even going to dignify this >>> with a response.