> It makes sense to start with this abstraction for the sake of code cleanliness and readability.
Agreed. Implementing a single Synchronizer class across the code base means that should it need to be refactored in the future, it's straightforward to do so (e.g., in any IDE it's trivial to locate the method calls). I see no real downside in replacing all the existing usage of "synchronized" with such a solution. On 10/10/23 05:46, arturobernalg (via GitHub) wrote:
It makes sense to start with this abstraction for the sake of code cleanliness and readability.
........................................................................... Murray Altheim <murray18 at altheim dot com> = = === http://www.altheim.com/murray/ === === = = === In the evening The rice leaves in the garden Rustle in the autumn wind That blows through my reed hut. -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu
