Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #18575
| From | Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Wormholes |
| Date | 2012-09-06 21:08 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <slrnk4i45m.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <u40lh9-726.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> <slrnk4grd8.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <libmh9-9h7.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> <slrnk4hf7o.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <m69nh9-663.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> |
Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> wrote: > On 06/09/12 16:10, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >> Back to the Box-example: as the Box-framework may not expect the >> getContent() call to depend on any outer local context, it might >> evaluate it earlier, and just return a cached result on your call. > No, not in this case. The whole point of this framework is ... That was more than I really cared to know about that Box-framework ;-) > The possibility of being screwed only comes if the getContent or > getChildContent methods decide to call getFieldContent() indirectly by > starting another thread. For this framework, I don't foresee it > happening. Even if it did, I might be able still to make a lesser > guarantee, that such threads are descendants of the original thread, so > an InheritableThreadLocal would still work. Still an unsafe assumption: Only after you changed ThreadLocal to InheritedThreadLocal and start to feel safe again, the framework would be optimized further, to use pool-threads, of course ;-) > If even that's no good, and an extra parameter is required, what should > it be, since the framework has no knowledge of how many or what types of > contexts are required? Some Context class that contains/references the complete last-minute knowledge of the site where getContent() is called from. It should be the same instance for the whole tree of boxes. Even if some of the "possible framework changes" won't happen with your Box framework, they might do so for whatever framework the OP uses.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Wormholes Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-09-03 18:12 -0700
Re: Wormholes eric@invalid.com (EricF) - 2012-09-04 02:06 +0000
Re: Wormholes Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-09-04 10:08 -0700
Re: Wormholes Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-09-09 13:55 +0200
Re: Wormholes Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-09-03 22:34 -0400
Re: Wormholes Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2012-09-04 12:15 +0200
Re: Wormholes markspace <-@.> - 2012-09-03 21:00 -0700
Re: Wormholes Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-04 07:08 +0200
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 08:47 +0200
Re: Wormholes Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-09-04 03:10 -0700
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 16:09 +0200
Re: Wormholes Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-09-04 08:34 -0700
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 17:46 +0200
Re: Wormholes Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-09-04 09:31 -0700
Re: Wormholes Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-09-04 11:14 -0700
Re: Wormholes Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-09-04 19:59 -0400
Re: Wormholes Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-09-04 13:20 -0700
Re: Wormholes Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-09-04 20:00 -0400
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:01 +0200
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:02 +0200
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:02 +0200
Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:03 +0200
Re: Wormholes markspace <-@.> - 2012-09-05 17:34 -0700
Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-04 14:18 +0100
Re: Wormholes Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-05 21:51 +0200
Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-05 23:26 +0100
Re: Wormholes Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-09-06 09:32 +0000
Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-06 11:47 +0100
Re: Wormholes Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-09-06 15:10 +0000
Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-06 20:12 +0100
Re: Wormholes Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-09-06 21:08 +0000
Re: Wormholes Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2012-09-04 17:26 +0100
Re: Wormholes Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-09-04 09:28 -0700
Re: Wormholes David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-09-04 16:54 -0400
csiph-web