Usually that's called "visibility". Atoms are *not* subject to race conditions if swap! is called from multiple threads (the state of the atom will not change while the update function is being applied). The atom is thus "safe" to be used from multiple threads.
Volatiles *are* subject to race conditions with vswap! is called from multiple threads (the state of the volatile may change while the update function is being applied). The volatile is thus "dangerous" and safety is derived from how it's used. On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:44:27 AM UTC-5, Brent Millare wrote: > > When I say synchronization, I specifically mean "writes are guaranteed to > be seen by subsequent reads on any thread*" *as Alex said. > > On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 9:37:09 AM UTC-4, Brent Millare wrote: >> >> So to summarize, Clojure's volatile provides synchronization across >> threads but does not provide atomaticity with vswap!. So, as a follow up >> question, then why would the creation of a volatile be "dangerous" but >> creating an atom isn't? (Hence the exclamation point in the name >> "volatile!") >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
