Re:Fear and Loathing in Lock-Free Programming
by charleslmunger on Monday October 09, 2017 @10:18PM
(#15438804)
I agree with this, mostly.
Sometimes the lock free version of a Java program is simpler than the version with locks. For example, I've often written classes where all the state was easy to fit into a single atomicreference.
The real danger comes from writing a lock free program without knowing they type of problems that are hard to solve without locks. Just like cryptography, the greatest danger comes from engineers who know just enough to be dangerous.
Re:Fear and Loathing in Lock-Free Programming
by krenoten on Monday October 09, 2017 @02:41PM
(#15436341)
SPIN is a nice tool for modeling them. You can extract code from a coq model. You can go into the world of dynamic instrumentation to try to verify invariants in implementations.
Sometimes the lock free version of a Java program is simpler than the version with locks. For example, I've often written classes where all the state was easy to fit into a single atomicreference.
The real danger comes from writing a lock free program without knowing they type of problems that are hard to solve without locks. Just like cryptography, the greatest danger comes from engineers who know just enough to be dangerous.