Re: [picocontainer-dev] Re: [picocontainer-scm] [3768] java/2.x/trunk/pico/container/src/test/org/picocontainer/behaviors: reentrant lock stuff - alternative to synchronized
Paul Hammant <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.picocontainer.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jörg mentioned it some months back. Suggesting we could switch to it from synchronized. The IBM article suggests its better for now, but not forever. Rekindling that discussion. Should we roll this into Caching or is it best to have things separate? - Paul On Jul 28, 2007, at 4:38 PM, peter royal wrote: > On Jul 28, 2007, at 4:05 PM, Paul Hammant wrote: >> There is some suggestion that the concurrent way is faster - >> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp10264/ >> >> But that may not always be so. > > true.. still seems like its providing an extra, redundant choice. > less is more! :) > > -pete > > -- > (peter.royal|osi)@pobox.com - http://fotap.org/~osi >