OK, that makes sense. However, only objects that are immutable from construction are thread-safe without needing some kind of synchronisation.
Passing it to a newly created thread would be OK (Thread.start() is synch.), but if it is passed to an existing thread some other means of synch. would be needed. On 24/04/2009, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > My view is that once it is immutable it is immutable. Restoring mutability > is done by making a new copy and in the context of the applications I was > describing is essentially never done. > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:39 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > allow a programmer to make a mutable copy that > > > is manipulated for a while destructively and then marked as immutable > > when > > > it is exposed to the outside world. > > > > How does that work? > > Do threads have to get a shared read-lock or exclusive write-lock on the > > object? > > > > > > -- > Ted Dunning, CTO > DeepDyve > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
