RFR 8005704: Update ConcurrentHashMap to v8

[Chris Hegarty]

Thank you Doug, this addresses my concerns.

On 05/28/2013 11:29 AM, Doug Lea wrote:
> On 05/27/13 10:30, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>
>>
>> 1) CHM no longer extends AbstractMap. I guess this should not be a
>>     problem in the real world, and I guess users would not be too
>>     surprised by instanceof checks. Just worth highlighting the change
>>     for compatibility.
>
> Yes, thanks. It was a bad idea to extend AbstractMap in the first place,
> since all of its methods are or should be overridden. But if
> there is any reason to retain this, it is harmless to do so,

OK, this can be the backup plan if this issue arises during CCC.

> at the expense of adding two unused fields to footprint.
> (The AbstractMap keySet and Values fields cannot be used
> by CHM because they are package-protected, so it needs to
> declare its own versions anyway.)
>
>> 4) Does is make sense for KeySetView to be Serializable? It looks a
>>     little odd with value as its only field.
>>
>
> (Plus the backing ConcurrentHashMap.)

Yes, of course.

> Serialization is needed (or at least desired) because this class
> is now used for CHM.newKeySet, which finally adds a way to
> get the equivalent of a ConcurrentHashSet. (You could get one
> via Collections.newSetFromMap, but then lose the advertised
> concurrency/atomicity properties.)

Thanks,
-Chris.

>
> -Doug
>
>
>