ForkJoinPool update

Mike Duigou mike.duigou at
Thu Aug 9 10:13:10 PDT 2012

Thanks for clarifying Doug. This is as I expected. I didn't mean to imply in my note that there was any risk of substantial delay. It more that there is likely going to be a short period of integration dance at some point.


On Aug 9 2012, at 09:53 , Doug Lea wrote:

> On 08/09/12 12:47, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Does that imply we risk timely integration into JDK8 mainline if JSR166x
>> is not yet there?

No. It's expected that JSR166x will be integrating to JDK8 mainline regularly and timely enough for lambda's needs. If there are delays then they will be short.

>> Should we contact someone (is it you BTW?) to get the
>> ball rolling there?

Doug and JSR166x team are on track for their work and I'm watching the progress to make sure that lambda's requirements for JSR166x features match what's integrated (or soon to be integrated).


> We're pretty much always ready. We like to let users check out
> preview versions as long as we can though, because integration
> is not enough fun to do frequently, and it is especially not fun
> when changes in integrated but not-yet-released versions require
> that we file change requests to ourselves via Oracle.
> -Doug

More information about the lambda-dev mailing list