From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: A Gnother Gnasty bug
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 17:39:04 -0400
Date: 2012-04-09T17:39:04-04:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <wcchawsy493.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 16824531.853.1334005741021.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbv36
Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com> writes:
> That last isn't really true, I think.
Yes, you're right. An implementation can copy limited objects any time
it likes, so long as it makes the copy semantically invisible (which, as
you say, would involve fixing up all the pointers).
An implementation that does copying garbage collection would do that.
But otherwise, it isn't really practical. Think about copying locks
(as in protected objects).
If a copy isn't semantically visible, then is it a copy? ;-)
- Bob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-09 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-07 0:44 A Gnother Gnasty bug sbelmont700
2012-04-07 11:09 ` Ludovic Brenta
2012-04-07 12:48 ` sbelmont700
2012-04-07 13:55 ` Robert A Duff
2012-04-09 21:09 ` Adam Beneschan
2012-04-09 21:39 ` Robert A Duff [this message]
2012-04-07 11:54 ` Simon Wright
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox