Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #4853

Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/31/11 9:37 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 5/31/2011 8:45 PM, Peter Duniho wrote:
> ....
>> Spurious wakeup, yes (why people continue to tolerate that in Java, I
>> have no idea…plenty of other APIs with concurrency support don't have
>> that trouble).
>
> I don't continue to tolerate spurious wake-ups in Java. My view of wait
> and notify is that they are low level primitives that I used as long as
> they were all we had. Why not use e.g. CountDownLatch?

That's certainly one way to look at it.  But you are still "tolerating" 
spurious wake-ups in the sense in which I wrote that.  Why should the 
language _force_ you to avoid what would otherwise be perfectly good 
program statements?

In a language like Java, there really shouldn't be any such thing as 
"low level primitives", except those that are still useful and easy to 
use.  The entire programmer-available surface should be usable as-is. 
Yes, it's great when the libraries offer an abstraction that more 
closely fits ones needs, but for there to be statements in Java that 
pretty much just _always_ need working-around through the use of some 
helper class doesn't make sense to me.

Spurious wake-ups offer no benefit to the user (i.e. the programmer) and 
are a symptom of implementation detail bleeding through into the 
higher-level language.  It's a strange anomaly in what is otherwise 
normally a very helpful and relatively simple (in a good way) high-level 
language.

The .NET equivalent (for example) has well-defined and reliable 
behavior: if your thread wakes up from waiting, you know it was on 
purpose.  And guess what?  Sure, sometimes it's nice to wrap the "low 
level primitives" in a helper class (or use a pre-existing one), but a 
lot of the time it's just as easy to go ahead and use those "low level 
primitives", because they do what you _want_ them to do.

Pete

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

Thread

Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-31 15:00 +0100
  Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-05-31 07:14 -0700
    Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-31 16:46 +0100
      Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Deeyana <d.awlberg@hotmail.invalid> - 2011-05-31 19:23 +0000
        Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-06-01 22:12 +0100
      Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-05-31 20:45 -0700
        Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-31 21:37 -0700
          Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-06-01 07:18 -0700
            Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-06-01 09:01 -0700
        Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 16:40 +1200
          Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-06-01 11:22 -0400
            Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-02 10:15 +1200
              Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-06-01 21:38 -0400
        Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-06-01 22:07 +0100
          Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-06-01 22:46 -0700
  Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail markspace <-@.> - 2011-05-31 08:26 -0700
    Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-31 19:13 +0100
  Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-31 09:06 -0700
    Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Paul Cager <paul.cager@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-31 10:08 -0700
      Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-31 10:39 -0700
        Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Paul Cager <paul.cager@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-31 16:24 -0700
  Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 12:33 +1200
    Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-06-01 00:38 -0400
  Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-02 14:10 -0700
    Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-02 14:25 -0700
    Re: Making one or more threads wait for another to produce a value or fail Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-06-02 14:43 -0700

csiph-web