geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Subject Re: Why both concurrent and backport-util-concurrent?
Date Tue, 29 Aug 2006 23:13:22 GMT
Wow! I never expected you to do the conversion... very cool.

Here are the notes from my review  (I think only the first item is  
necessary and the rest are ideas or observations):

     I don't think we need to import the Latch class from  
concurrent.  We should be able to use the CountDownLatch class with  
the initial size set to 1.  This will also let us avoid the long  
discussion on the proper way to import the code :)

     It doesn't look like AbstractSinglePoolConnectionInterceptor  
ever uses the writeLock in the ReentrantReadWriteLock so it may be  
possible to replace that lock with a simpler ReentrantLock.

     I never noticed that Java5 atomics only have an incrementAndGet  
method and no increment method

     The changes in the configuration for the Executor in Java5 seem  
much better.


On Aug 29, 2006, at 3:22 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:

> Can someone peek at the patch I submitted which converts the code:
> --jason
> On Aug 28, 2006, at 9:45 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>> On Aug 27, 2006, at 4:36 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>> Any reason why we are using both of these libraries?  Why don't  
>>> we just convert to backport-util-concurrent so that we are closer  
>>> to being ready to use 1.5's java.util.concurrent... and have one  
>>> less bootstrap library to load?
>> ...and that is the reason.  No one has taken the time to convert  
>> over the code.
>> -dain

View raw message