Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #6402

Re: Why "lock" functionality is introduced for all the objects?

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date	Fri, 22 Jul 2011 11:30:49 -0500
Date	Fri, 22 Jul 2011 09:30:47 -0700
From	Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version	1.0
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> <4e28c4c4$0$308$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j0atr0$vph$2@speranza.aioe.org> <4e298683$0$315$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
In-Reply-To	<4e298683$0$315$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Message-ID	<D4Cdna1YPbEkOLTTnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@earthlink.com> (permalink)
Lines	26
X-Usenet-Provider	http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host	70.230.200.239
X-Trace	sv3-IVmvaoNkeEhIm21LV8omiFzeI/B/fhxNr6hAIoMuWBDNz+scrSeDh+Fz94xxKwwz6Z4ahzFOJ2NULhE!Y4ETyPmcFBnrE7R2E5f+Wsp4kSwMkpmcC9DfYTiEcdPqDxQ1phTNvXy8P1yCXrp/wFJywUXDf+or!/j0TfzhT8hpXzr0zO+RYQKZOdei4eDSVN0Uz9nGJqWTJRAE=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info	Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info	Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter	1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes	2521
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6402

Show key headers only | View raw

On 7/22/2011 7:17 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 7/22/2011 12:20 AM, Henderson wrote:
>> On 21/07/2011 8:30 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Others suggested that Lockable could have been a marker interface with
>> special significance to the compiler, ala Serializable. Java allows
>> multiple inheritance of interfaces.
>
> It could be, but does that provide any space in the data structure?

Compiler magic. Just as the compiler reacts the lack of any constructor
by generating a default constructor, it would react to the Lockable
interface by generating a field to contain the lock data.

Patricia

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

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