Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.help > #2437
| From | Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.help |
| Subject | Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections |
| Organization | N/A |
| References | (9 earlier) <kcmj4t$vkm$1@dont-email.me> <lvbocxdq9t.fsf@saunalahti.fi> <kcmr59$hp6$1@dont-email.me> <lvr4lspvge.fsf@saunalahti.fi> <kcneh0$kmh$1@dont-email.me> |
| Message-ID | <lvzk0gnqjy.fsf@saunalahti.fi> (permalink) |
| Date | 2013-01-11 09:10 +0200 |
Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> writes: > On 1/10/2013 4:41 PM, Jukka Lahtinen wrote: >> Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> writes: >>> If T2 makes such a call while T1 is in the synchronized block, >>> T2 will stall until T1's synchronized block finishes (or perhaps >>> longer). No race, no trouble. >> Only if you add the synchronization also to T2, like I did > Quoth the Javadoc for StringBuffer: > "Whenever an operation occurs involving a source sequence > (such as appending or inserting from a source sequence) > this class synchronizes only on the string buffer performing > the operation [...]" Oh, I stand corrected. It works in this case. But still I claim that when synchronization is needed, it is MOSTLY needed for a block broader than just the single call to a method of a jdk class instance. (And before anybody calls for "true Scotsman", I remembered to include the word mostly in my original claim as well.) -- Jukka Lahtinen
Back to comp.lang.java.help | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Steve <tinker123@gmail.com> - 2013-01-01 15:46 -0500
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Knute Johnson <nospam@knutejohnson.com> - 2013-01-01 14:18 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-01 15:43 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-01-01 16:17 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 11:12 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-01-02 12:56 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 17:46 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-03 05:59 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-03 15:30 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-09 12:17 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 12:56 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-01-09 13:10 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 14:51 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-01-09 15:22 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 16:26 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-01-09 16:42 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 16:54 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-01-10 10:30 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-10 10:58 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-01-09 16:50 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 16:59 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-01-10 08:18 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-10 10:49 -0800
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2013-01-10 13:37 +0200
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-01-10 09:27 -0500
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2013-01-10 17:14 +0200
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-01-10 11:44 -0500
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2013-01-10 23:41 +0200
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-01-10 17:14 -0500
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2013-01-11 09:10 +0200
Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-01-11 08:25 -0500
csiph-web