cases.
>
> Cheers,
> √
>
>
> *Viktor Klang*
> Software Architect, Java Platform Group
> Oracle
> --
> *From:* core-libs-dev on behalf of Jige
> Yu
> *Sent:* Friday, 30 May 2025 00:44
> *To:* David Holmes
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.
; > It would seem to require a change to the Java Language Specification
> > section 17.2.4
> >
> > Cheers,
> > √
> >
> > *
> > *
> > *Viktor Klang*
> > Software Architect, Java Platform Group
> > Oracle
>
.kl...@oracle.com>>
*Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org <mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.org>
mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with
InterruptedException
That said, I'm still curious. Have you considered propagating
heers,
> √
>
>
> *Viktor Klang*
> Software Architect, Java Platform Group
> Oracle
> --
> *From:* Jige Yu
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 28 May 2025 00:35
> *To:* Viktor Klang
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* Re: [External] :
: Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
That said, I'm still curious. Have you considered propagating cancellation,
re-interrupting the current thread, and then throwing an unchecked exception
upon interruption? It's going to be the most fail-fast-compatible.
g*
>> Software Architect, Java Platform Group
>> Oracle
>> --
>> *From:* Jige Yu
>> *Sent:* Monday, 26 May 2025 03:07
>> *To:* Viktor Klang
>> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [External] : Re: mapConcu
rm Group
> Oracle
> --
> *From:* Jige Yu
> *Sent:* Monday, 26 May 2025 03:07
> *To:* Viktor Klang
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
>
> Thanks Viktor!
>
> Sorry, I
: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Thanks Viktor!
Sorry, I was giving myself more time to read the code, but then I lost track.
If I'm reading the code right, the current behavior is that if the current
thread is interrupted, the m
Platform Group
> Oracle
>
> --
> *From:* Jige Yu
> *Sent:* Thursday, 6 February 2025 17:04
> *To:* Viktor Klang
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
>
> Sorry, did the PR
ary 2025 17:04
To: Viktor Klang
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Sorry, did the PR stop using Semaphore?
I had naively thought that mapConcurrent() will keep a buffer of Future of all
currently-running concurrent tasks (it
*To:* Jige Yu
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
>
> I think alignment in behavior between parallel Stream and mapConcurrent in
> terms of how interruptions are handled is a possible path forward.
>
> I d
: Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
I think alignment in behavior between parallel Stream and mapConcurrent in
terms of how interruptions are handled is a possible path forward.
I decided to close the PR for now as I realized my parallel Stream example had
misle
: Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Oh good call!
I forgot to check what parallel streams do upon interruption (didn't think they
do any blocking calls, but at least the main thread must block).
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 8:18 AM Viktor Klang
mailto:viktor.kl...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi
are Architect, Java Platform Group
> Oracle
> --
> *From:* Jige Yu
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 5 February 2025 16:24
> *To:* Viktor Klang
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
>
>
jdk.org<mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.org>
mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.org>>
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Thanks Viktor!
It looks like the current fix ignores interruption.
I want to make sure my concern of it defeating cancellation is heard an
them.
>
> Cheers,
> √
>
>
> *Viktor Klang*
> Software Architect, Java Platform Group
> Oracle
> --
> *From:* Jige Yu
> *Sent:* Monday, 27 January 2025 17:00
> *To:* Viktor Klang
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject
: Monday, 27 January 2025 17:00
To: Viktor Klang
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Thanks Viktor!
It looks like the current fix ignores interruption.
I want to make sure my concern of it defeating cancellation is heard and
tor Klang
> *Cc:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* [External] : Re: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
>
> Checking in on what you've found out, Viktor.
>
> From where we left off, I understand that you were looking at alternatives
> instead of silent truncatio
: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Checking in on what you've found out, Viktor.
From where we left off, I understand that you were looking at alternatives
instead of silent truncation?
Have you reached any conclusion?
We touched on disallowing interruption during mapConcurrent(). I still
ang*
> Software Architect, Java Platform Group
> Oracle
> ------
> *From:* core-libs-dev on behalf of Jige
> Yu
> *Sent:* Friday, 3 January 2025 17:53
> *To:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
> *Subject:* mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
>
ers,
√
Viktor Klang
Software Architect, Java Platform Group
Oracle
From: core-libs-dev on behalf of Jige Yu
Sent: Friday, 3 January 2025 17:53
To: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
Subject: mapConcurrent() with InterruptedException
Hi Java Experts,
I sent this email in
Hi Java Experts,
I sent this email incorrectly to loom-dev@ and was told on Reddit that
core-libs-dev is the right list.
The question is about the behavior of mapConcurrent() when the thread is
interrupted.
Currently mapConcurrent()'s finisher phase will re-interrupt the thread,
then stop at wha
22 matches
Mail list logo
