I have a lot of code that used to be similar to this: int num = 15; if(callback) callback(&num);/* this function may or may not change the value of num */
I\'ve seen this sentence: the general rule is, if you have variables of primitive type that must be shared among multiple threads,
So I just learned about the volatile keyword while writing some examples for a section that I am TAing tomorrow. I wrote a quick program to demonstrate that the ++ and -- operations are not atomic.
This question already has answers here: Java memory model: volatile variables and happens-before (3 answers)
I have a question concerning volatile keyword I can\'t seem to find an answer for. In my app I have data class that is shared as a state buffer between threads, and I need it to be updated regularly
I\'m using an embedded compiler for the TI TMS320F28335, so I\'m not sure if this is a general C++ problem (don\'t have a C++ compiler running on hand) or just my compiler. Putting the following code
Here\'s the problem: your program temporarily uses some sensitive data and wants to erase it when it\'s no longer needed. Using std::fill() on itself won\'t always help - the compiler might decide tha
InterlockedIncrement and other Interlocked operations declare their arguments as volatile. Why? What is the intent开发者_如何学Pythonion and effect of this?The probable effect is very minimal. The mos
I have a class A that I overload its operator=. However it is required that I need to do something like this:
The question came up when I saw this code: private static volatile ConcurrentHashMap<String, String> cMap = null;
加载中,请稍侯......