X-Received: by 10.224.171.72 with SMTP id g8mr4790741qaz.7.1375374632571; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:30:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.182.181.42 with SMTP id dt10mr8118obc.16.1375374632544; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:30:32 -0700 (PDT)
Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!fx3no438337qab.0!news-out.google.com!he10ni0qab.0!nntp.google.com!fx3no438334qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 09:30:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51fa7dea$0$298$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=128.154.209.199; posting-account=joYf0QoAAABuKpgQQh7YUEwuKkFQczA8
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.154.209.199
References: <8fe57dc2-a323-4821-941c-4036663cbce5@googlegroups.com> <51f9df70$0$52766$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> <7bf3ea0e-533b-4cfe-a85d-ad75b5d3657c@googlegroups.com> <51fa7dea$0$298$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bb16ff48-e2f7-4d2c-8910-24107773b77b@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: What is so bad aboud Thread.stop() ?
From: taqmcg@gmail.com
Injection-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 16:30:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:24872

On Thursday, August 1, 2013 11:25:25 AM UTC-4, Arne Vajh=F8j wrote:
> On 8/1/2013 11:00 AM, usvirtualobservatory@gmail.com wrote:
>=20
> I think it is something like:
>=20
>=20
>=20
> You can achieve what you want to do in two ways:=20
> A) use Thread.stop
> B) set a flag and let the thread do what it need to do to
>     terminate in a graceful manner
>=20
>=20
> #A can be done safely in some cases and can not be done safely in
> other cases. Even if it can be done safely, then it will require
> significant analysis to get it right. And even if it gets done
> right, then there is a high risk that that a bug will be introduced
> during maintenance later, because the maintenance programmer do not
> have the skill or the time to understand the subtleties of the
> problem.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> #B can always be done safely. It requires not much work. And
> is relative maintenance friendly.
>=20
> Easy choice in my opinion.
>=20
> Arne

Sure...  If you control all the code, and your code has no bugs in it (so t=
hat no infinite loop occurs somewhere you didn't expect).  That's not alway=
s the case -- I certainly expect that my code has bugs and I use a fair num=
ber of external libraries which may have bugs of there own.

Since most of my task code is single threaded and numerical, and I'd plan o=
n throwing away anything touched by a killed thread, a lot of the concerns =
that are brought up seem more handleable than might be the case in other ap=
plications.

   Tom