Whither structured concurrency?

Andrew Haley aph at redhat.com
Thu Nov 14 16:07:16 UTC 2019

On 11/14/19 3:05 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> That's not entirely true because if the parent thread continues to run
> -- which happens with Threads but not with structured concurrency --
> then the parent's set of bound locals changes, even though the values
> themselves do not. Therefore there is no choice but to clone the set
> at the point of (light or heavy) thread creation. When structured
> concurrency returns there will be no need to do this, so a pointer
> will suffice.

It has been pointed out to me that inheriting scoped locals at the
point of Thread creation makes no sense, and we should only inherit
through structured concurrency; therefore please forget the above!

In other words: right you are.


Andrew Haley  (he/him)
Java Platform Lead Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671

More information about the loom-dev mailing list