Hi Murray,
to add some context to the PR, from what I understand, the important
thing about the Synchronizer class, is more on the switch to use
ReentrantLock instead of synchronized blocks, than the code
readability/simplification. The Synchronizer class just captures an
idiom throughout the code
Hi Murray
I'd like to clarify the main goal of my PR, which is to transition from
traditional synchronized blocks to the more modern ReentrantLocks. The
Synchronizer class is essentially a way to standardize this transition
across the codebase.
I agree with Juan Pablo's point about the benefits o
arturobernalg opened a new pull request, #314:
URL: https://github.com/apache/jspwiki/pull/314
(no comment)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe,
HI Arturo and Juan Pablo,
I don't disagree with anything either of you have written. I'm all in
favour of the ReentrantLock replacement via a Synchronizer pattern.
I'm only suggesting, as does both Larman/Guthrie and the quoted section
("There is no need to replace synchronized blocks and method
