Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #6383
| Date | 2011-07-21 20:30 -0400 |
|---|---|
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? |
| References | <d0bb9e06-16f0-4282-a37e-47e9ca9630ec@r2g2000vbj.googlegroups.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106302251380.3024@urchin.earth.li> |
| Message-ID | <4e28c4c4$0$308$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> (permalink) |
| Organization | SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source |
On 6/30/2011 6:04 PM, Tom Anderson wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Alex J wrote: >> The better decision, IMHO, would be to introduce lock/wait mechanics >> for only, say, the Lockable descendants. > > I agree with this, actually. There might be some small performance > improvement, but it would also make the locking behaviour of code more > explicit, and so clearer. Given that Java does not allow multiple inheritance then that would have been tough restriction. Arne
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 20:30 -0400
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-22 00:20 -0400
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-22 10:17 -0400
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-22 09:30 -0700
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-22 09:45 -0700
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-22 14:53 -0400
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2011-07-22 04:39 +0000
Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-22 10:19 -0400
csiph-web