Single Thread Continuation

[Robert Engels]

That is built into the Iterator interface. 

> On Jul 4, 2023, at 4:05 AM, Alex Otenko <oleksandr.otenko at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 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/20230704/1fb8af54/attachment.htm>