RFR: 8314480: Memory ordering spec updates in java.lang.ref

[Mandy Chung]

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 23:17:29 GMT, Brent Christian <bchristi at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ref/Reference.java line 393:
>> 
>>> 391:      * Clears this reference object. Invoking this method does not enqueue this
>>> 392:      * object, and the garbage collector will no longer enqueue this object once
>>> 393:      * the referent reaches the designated reachability level.
>> 
>> I'm wondering if "designated reachability level" is the right words to use here. The Notification section in the package description speaks of when the reachability of the referent has changed to the value corresponding to the type of the reference and I wonder if it might be better to use wording consistent with that. Minimally it could link to the package description where the notion of reachability level is introduced.
>
> Perhaps it's sufficient to say simply that, _"the garbage collector will no longer enqueue this object."_

Is this sentence needed?   Excluding the race scenario as described in the javadoc, it would be equivalent as if the Reference with null referent which will never get enqueued?

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16644#discussion_r1398032486