Re: unchecked conversion warning.
On 31.05.2012 22:50, Eric Sosman wrote:
On 5/31/2012 4:23 PM, Jens wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2012 07:54:33 -0700 (PDT), Robert
Klemme<shortcutter@googlemail.com>
wrote:
On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 3:32:43 PM UTC+2, (unknown) wrote:
import java.util.Vector;
Another remark: it is usually recommended to not use Vector any more,
because the synchronization overhead is unnecessary most of the time
- unless some API forces you to. The proper replacement is ArrayList.
If synchronization is needed then usually
Collections.synchronizedList() will do.
I used DefaultTableModel and Vector because it was the simplest and
easiest way to get the
project up and running. And the Oracles tutorial is, even today
(2012), still using this
approach without any remarks.
DefaultTableModel wasn't mentioned in the original post. Then that's
the API case I mentioned (as has been stated already).
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Vector. People will
moan and wring their hands over the cost of its synchronized methods,
but I haven't heard of any actual measurements.
You could argue whether it's worthwhile to synchronize every method.
Note that this does not automatically give thread safety out of the box
(concurrent iteration, multiple operations which need to be atomic) so
Vector could give you a false impression of thread safety. See Lew's
remarks also.
(JavaDoc is both a blessing and a curse: It's a blessing in that
developers *are* encouraged to write documentation, and it's a curse
in that *developers* are encouraged to write documentation. ;)
In what ways is that a curse? I would actually say that the weight
totally falls on the blessing side because JavaDoc together with modern
IDE makes the threshold so low to write documentation that there really
is not much of an excuse left to not do it. And documentation is important.
Kind regards
robert
--
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/