2010/9/30 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: > On 30 September 2010 02:58, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:46 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Just wondering if the Tailer API could be simplified by performing the >>> thread start within the class? >>> Is it ever going to be useful to have direct access to tailer thread? >>> I suspect not, as the Listener should provide sufficient access. >>> >>> It's not safe to start a thread in the constructor (unless the ctor is >>> final), but one could use static factory methods instead. >>> >>> So instead of: >>> >>> TailerListener listener = ... >>> Tailer tailer = new Tailer(file, listener, delay); >>> Thread thread = new Thread(tailer); >>> thread.start(); >>> ... >>> tailer.stop() >>> >>> one would do something like: >>> >>> TailerListener listener = ... >>> Tailer tailer = Tailer.createTailer(file, listener, delay); >>> ... >>> tailer.stop() >>> >>> This simplifies the API, and allows the class to force the thread to >>> be a daemon thread. It also stops the caller from messing with the >>> thread. >>> >>> WDYT? >> >> There are five different Thread constructors that take a Runnable and >> a bunch of other methods that someone might want to use. I don't have >> a problem providing a convenience static method - but it only saves >> two lines of code - as long as they can construct one manually with or >> without a Thread if they want to. > > But what is the use case for having access to the created thread? > Seems to me it would be a lot safer if the thread were private to the class.
The use case is that someone may want to use an Executor instead of a dedicated Thread to run background tasks such as Tailer, at least I do. I have no problem with providing a convenient static method, as Niall suggested, but I would like to keep the Tailer as a Runnable with no embedded thread if possible. HTH, Julien > > It would still be possible to use the code without a thread by > exposing the method that loops over the file, and using the > constructor instead. > For example with the current code one could do something like: > > TailerListener listener = ... > Tailer tailer = new Tailer(file, listener, delay); > tailer.run() > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
