Re: More accurate wording for java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit.sleep

Hi Pavel,

Yes my bad. Timeunit itself takes care of the <= 0 behaviour.

David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pavel Rappo
> Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2019 1:09 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Thorsten Goetzke <[email protected]>; David Holmes <[email protected]>; concurrency-interest <concurrency-
> [email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [concurrency-interest] More accurate wording for java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit.sleep
> 
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 2:25 PM David Holmes via Concurrency-interest <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > BTW the claim that a sleep time of zero does not sleep at all is also not quite accurate - it's implemented as a "yield" so may or may
> not actually result in the thread going off CPU. As Doug used to put it sleep(0) means "sleep for at least no time".
> 
> If I understand this correctly, TimeUnit.sleep does not try to specify how Thread.sleep behaves. Instead, TimeUnit.sleep builds on top
> of Thread.sleep's behavior by saying that if TimeUnit.sleep(timeout) is called with timeout <= 0, then the Thread.sleep method is not
> called at all. But I can definitely see how it might be confusing given that TimeUnit.sleep is designed as "a convenience method that
> converts time arguments into the form required by the {@code Thread.sleep} method."

_______________________________________________
Concurrency-interest mailing list
[email protected]
http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest