4 ms·
It's true that Java took a long time to develop (good) concurrent collections, but I will suggest that they're more important in 2016 than they were in 1995. Co
by hyperpape 10y ago
It's true that Java took a long time to develop (good) concurrent collections, but I will suggest that they're more important in 2016 than they were in 1995. Core counts are increasing, and the competition from other languages is better.
I'm not saying we should be disgusted if there aren't immediately awesome concurrent data structures, but you can't be satisfied with waiting until 2024 (the equivalent of Java 1.5, I believe).
- bluejekyll 10y agoI didn't mean to imply that a ten year wait was acceptable. That being said, expecting stable concurrent libraries just one year after the language stabilized isn't reasonable. Futures just landed, and those seem like a good first step toward a good concurrency model.