Single Thread Continuation

[Alex Otenko]

How does the generator tell the consumer that no more values are
forthcoming?

On Mon, 3 Jul 2023, 12:38 Robert Engels, <rengels at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Believe me. Queues are all you need there is no memory leak and no need to
> “close”. The producer side uses a weak reference to the queue. When there
> are no more strong references the producer side can terminate.
>
> You can’t use a standard blocking queue for this - but the queue
> implementation is fairly trivial - with a wake-up thread that listens on
> the weak reference queue.
>
> On Jul 3, 2023, at 6:19 AM, Attila Kelemen <attila.kelemen85 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
>
>>
>> 2. We need to synchronize access to mutable state to avoid memory
>>    hazards. This is a separate issue from synchronizing access to
>>    mutable state to avoid correctness issues. With virtual threads on
>>    a single platform thread, this goes away too (because it's always
>>    the same thread observing memory operations; no barriers needed).
>>
>>
> That still seems incorrect to me (in principle, in practice it most likely
> will end up to be fine, but I just wouldn't rely on it), because the
> barrier is needed to prevent instruction reordering by the compiler, and
> you are not safe from that by using the same platform thread.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20230704/2ecbc569/attachment.htm>