You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to bangalor...@googlegroups.com, ig...@googlegroups.com
Thanks for sharing!
Saager Mhatre
unread,
Oct 19, 2010, 2:06:06 AM10/19/10
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to bangalor...@googlegroups.com, ig...@googlegroups.com
Roshan, haven't been following GPars as well as I should have; but, I
believe GParsPool makes memoizations thread-safe. Do those guarantees
hold in the Groovy port?
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Roshan Dawrani <roshan...@gmail.com> wrote:
- dexter
Roshan Dawrani
unread,
Oct 19, 2010, 2:13:54 AM10/19/10
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to bangalor...@googlegroups.com, ig...@googlegroups.com
Hi Saager,
I don't think so, but then I am not an expert in GPars myself. Why don't you bring it up on the main groovy mailing list?
I am sure Vaclav will be happy to clarify it - having done both memoize() implementation in GPars as well as its port to Groovy
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to bangalor...@googlegroups.com, ig...@googlegroups.com
yeah, i need to get back on the groovy-dev and groovy-user lists; it'll have to wait for the weekend a quick look at the code seemed to indicate that it wasn't really thread safe, java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap doesn't lock for retrievals