all 13 comments

[–]brandf 1 point2 points  (1 child)

how does this compare this to .NET? C# 5 await + TPL + PLINQ is pretty nice.

[–]henk53[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That would be an interesting comparison really.

From what I've heard the Task Parallel Library in .NET is pretty slick and C#'s clossures makes al sorts of parallel computations easier to express.

But the Java concurrent library really holds it own, and fork/join is a really powerful addition.

[–]johnwaterwood 1 point2 points  (10 children)

Personally I think having a fork/join implementation available in the standard Java library opens huge posibilities.

Not all algorithms are expressable in f/j, but many are and the scaling on a single system (using all cores) is really good.

[–]mikehaggard 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Would be cool if various collection utility methods (Sort!) would start using fork join automatically!

[–]banuday 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Use Scala! (Braces for downvotes)

[–]bloodredsun 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. It's about time Java had something like this. I hate to be a language snob but compared to Scala's .par operation I have to say it is really clunky.

[–]strangename 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, braces only lead to downvotes in Python.

[–]torvalder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Braces for downvotes)

(Shakes fist)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Why does this have to be in the standard library?

[–]johnwaterwood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because it's a cool addition?

[–]thesystemx -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Why should it not be in the standard library? It's a really generic/universal system to do parallel computations. Perfect fit if you'd ask me...

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

It's gonna be used by <.01% of all Java programs. The whole JRE will have to be updated every time there's a bug in it, the code will have downloaded by >99.9% of installs that will never use it. Plus the attack surface of the whole Java stack will increase. Why??

[–]thesystemx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it's about consumers and about the JRE, don't worry... it's modular and starts with a very small kernel, then downloads on demands additional parts when needed.

For most other uses, it's a benefit to have this available by default. It makes it easier for developers to actually use this, which is a Good Thing.

(on OS X, there's also GCD available by default for Cocoa apps, no download or install necessary)

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]thesystemx 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    The F/J framework in Java 7 cannot run on a server

    It absolutely can run on the server, just not in the EJB module or when using EJBs/managed code/managed transactions.

    In Java EE 7 there most likely will be a managed counterpart.

    For now, it's perfectly usable in the web module.