ConcurrentHashMap/ConcurrentMap/Map.compute

[Brian Goetz]

Extraneous {@code fragment in compute().

I think the semantics of compute can be explained better; people will 
likely confuse it with computeIfAbsent.  There's an aspect of reduction 
going on here; the remapping function is like a reducer under the "null 
means nothing there" semantics.  It would be great if the name could 
suggest this; barring that the docs should explain it.  Only when users 
get to the "create or append" example will they get it.

Seems like you didn't yet fold in the bits about scope of atomicity? 
Will that go in CM docs?

What do you mean by "possibly iterative equivalent of"?

On 12/7/2012 11:16 AM, Doug Lea wrote:
> On 12/07/12 09:51, Doug Lea wrote:
>
>> Basic idea: defaults for function-accepting Map methods are solely
>> in terms of the 4 CM methods, which are in turn non-atomic for non-CM....
>
> See update at:
> http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/wwwtmp/apis/Map.html
>
> These probably now take more effort for users to understand, but
> otherwise seem pretty good to me.
>
> Any complaints?
>
> (I reordered some of the decls so that they would flow a little
> better for the 5% (if that) of users who ever read the Javadocs
> sequentially.)
>
> -Doug
>
>
>
>