request for advice: safepoints in the JSR 292 spec

[Jim Laskey]

On 2010-12-11, at 4:38 PM, Rémi Forax wrote:

> I think it's possible to use a synchronized block enclosing the setTargets and the corresponding syncs
> instead of syncTargets. From my experience, changing something on a metaclass
> often require to propagate changes on subclasses. This can't be done using atomics
> so you already need such synchronized block.

Maybe I misunderstood.  I was assuming that syncTargets was a VM operation (at safepoint.)