On Thu, 8 May 2025 13:47:41 GMT, kabutz wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/LinkedBlockingDeque.java
>> line 341:
>>
>>> 339: if (count >= capacity)
>>> 340: return false;
>>> 341: linkFirst(node);
>>
>> I'm a bit uneasy about incr
On Thu, 8 May 2025 14:28:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/LinkedBlockingDeque.java
>> line 865:
>>
>>> 863: long n = 0;
>>> 864: for (E e : c) {
>>> 865: Objects.requireNonNull(e);
>>
>> This makes me wonder: Does it make sen
On Thu, 8 May 2025 08:59:59 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
>> a single bug report and PR.
>>
>> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
>> put/take
>>
>> The LinkedBlockingDeque does no
On Thu, 8 May 2025 08:33:06 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> I'm a bit uneasy about incrementing the `count` in `linkFirst` but not
> enforcing the invariant. What's the benefit to changing linkFirst and
> linkLast to return void instead of keeping the original returning a boolean?
I based the appro
On Thu, 8 May 2025 08:41:52 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> We could likely check if there's any remaining capacity up front, and
> immediately return false?
We could if you like. I wanted to make as few changes as possible, to not
introduce unexpected changes. This particular bug was to stop a siz
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:23:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
> a single bug report and PR.
>
> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
> put/take
>
> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave con
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:23:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
> a single bug report and PR.
>
> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
> put/take
>
> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave con
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:23:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
> a single bug report and PR.
>
> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
> put/take
>
> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave con
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:23:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
> a single bug report and PR.
>
> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
> put/take
>
> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave con
On Wed, 7 May 2025 10:43:55 GMT, kabutz wrote:
>> @kabutz Thanks for opening this PR—just confirming that it's on my to-review
>> queue.
>
> @viktorklang-ora any idea whom else we can ask to approve this PR?
> @kabutz I think @AlanBateman might be able to have a look as well.
>
> As for timing
On Wed, 7 May 2025 10:43:55 GMT, kabutz wrote:
>> @kabutz Thanks for opening this PR—just confirming that it's on my to-review
>> queue.
>
> @viktorklang-ora any idea whom else we can ask to approve this PR?
@kabutz I think @AlanBateman might be able to have a look as well.
As for timing, it s
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 19:48:40 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> @viktorklang-ora @DougLea @AlanBateman
>
> @kabutz Thanks for opening this PR—just confirming that it's on my to-review
> queue.
@viktorklang-ora any idea whom else we can ask to approve this PR?
-
PR Comment: https://git.op
On Fri, 2 May 2025 13:19:13 GMT, Doug Lea wrote:
>> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
>> a single bug report and PR.
>>
>> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
>> put/take
>>
>> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not be
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:23:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
> a single bug report and PR.
>
> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
> put/take
>
> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave con
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:33:50 GMT, kabutz wrote:
>> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
>> a single bug report and PR.
>>
>> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
>> put/take
>>
>> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not beh
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:23:18 GMT, kabutz wrote:
> We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into
> a single bug report and PR.
>
> 1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
> put/take
>
> The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave con
We logged several bugs on the LinkedBlockingDeque. This aggregates them into a
single bug report and PR.
1. LinkedBlockingDeque does not immediately throw InterruptedException in
put/take
The LinkedBlockingDeque does not behave consistently with other concurrency
components. If we call putFirs
17 matches
Mail list logo
