We're getting just a bit off-topic, but I'll continue briefly in hope
it sheds some useful light somewhere...
With what tool were you identifying a "zombie" thread? Did you examine
where it was on its stack?
If it has an active Java stack, then it's still busy, and not a
zombie.
A thread OBJECT
Ken Warner wrote:
> Is AsyncTask a part of the Android SDK?
Yes. android.os.AsyncTask arrived in Android 1.5.
--
Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy)
http://commonsware.com | http://twitter.com/commonsguy
_The Busy Coder's Guide to *Advanced* Android Development_
Version 1.3 Available!
--
You received
I'm not trying to argue -- but I've seen dead threads (zombies) hang
around for a long time. Null all possible references in your code
*AFTER* you are done with the thread and do an explicit gc(). I didn't
say that nulling a reference would kill the thread. It only helps
garbage collection.
Th
What evidence do you have of this? What exactly do you mean by a
zombie thread?
I've been programming Java since sometime near when it came out --
well over a decade, on various platforms. I've never seen anything I'd
term a zombie thread, nor a thread problem that would be solved by
nulling threa
So, there´s nothing to worry about then!
Thanks for your answers and help!
On 13 mar, 15:42, Streets Of Boston wrote:
> Like Mark said, AsyncTasks use a pool of threads that manages itself.
>
> An AsyncTask is NOT a thread. It uses a pool of threads to execute a
> task on. It is based on the Futu
Like Mark said, AsyncTasks use a pool of threads that manages itself.
An AsyncTask is NOT a thread. It uses a pool of threads to execute a
task on. It is based on the FutureTasks and ExecutorService of the
java.util.concurrent package.
When you create a new AsyncTask, you don't create a new threa
6 matches
Mail list logo
