Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: markspace <-@.> Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: A question about synchronized threads Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:07:14 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: <3f249d87-aaf8-4732-9ee8-fd112cf82553@f31g2000pri.googlegroups.com> <68sr88-fuj.ln1@dagon.net> <0f043640-9fb3-430f-bcf6-d830a2dd6e81@k15g2000pri.googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=EUC-KR Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 02:07:22 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="pYb/yoo+Q58g8sOMt7I33A"; logging-data="23192"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18HLO477w+kQiQBXcFHANUw15apy2qB/58=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 In-Reply-To: <0f043640-9fb3-430f-bcf6-d830a2dd6e81@k15g2000pri.googlegroups.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:AeCQVTQoHEB3M8Sum1bry3HTMOo= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:3370 On 4/29/2011 6:49 PM, byhesed wrote: > > Also, although two methods need to be synchronized, > if two methods are totally unrelated to each other, > then it would be too bad, isn't it? > The rate of using CPU resources will be too low. Be careful with that word "unrelated," things can seem unrelated when they aren't. Correct is more important that ineffectual. However, if it is obvious that the methods could be improved, then sure it's OK to improve them, and you do seem to have the right track. I think we're all just saying that concurrency can be tricky. I'd would still like to see a complete example class ;-)