Join Java: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:04, 2 August 2021

Revision as of 11:58, 30 May 2023

Line 17:

* Order class modifiers for determining the order that patterns are matched

Concurrency in most popular programming languages is implemented using constructs such as semaphores and monitors. Libraries are emerging (such as the Java concurrency library JSR-166) that provide higher-level concurrency semantics. Communicating[[communicating Sequentialsequential Processesprocesses]] (CSP), Calculus of Communicating Systems (CCS) and Pi have higher-level synchronization behaviours defined implicitly through the composition of events at the interfaces of concurrent processes. Join calculus, in contrast, has explicit synchronization based on a localized conjunction of events defined as reduction rules. <!--Can someone please translate the previous two sentences into English? --> Join semantics try to provide explicit expressions of synchronization without breaching the object-oriented idea of modularization, including dynamic creation and destruction of processes and channels.

The Join Java language can express virtually all published concurrency patterns without explicit recourse to low-level monitor calls. In general, Join Java programs are more concise than their Java equivalents. The overhead introduced in Join Java by the higher-level expressions derived from the Join calculus is manageable. The synchronization expressions associated with monitors (wait and notify) which are normally located in the body of methods can be replaced by Join Java expressions (the Join methods) which form part of the method signature.