tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8712770457197348465.post7143665085636093655..comments2024-03-28T02:47:19.159-07:00Comments on Javarevisited: Top 10 Multithreading and Concurrency Best Practices for Experienced Java Developersjavin paulhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15028902221295732276noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8712770457197348465.post-56745306061696620682015-05-31T08:11:56.267-07:002015-05-31T08:11:56.267-07:00Also please check the imple Lock implementation:
...Also please check the imple Lock implementation:<br /><br />public class Lock{<br /><br /> private boolean isLocked = false;<br /><br /> public synchronized void lock()<br /> throws InterruptedException{<br /> while(isLocked){<br /> wait();<br /> }<br /> isLocked = true;<br /> }<br /><br /> public synchronized void unlock(){<br /> isLocked = false;<br /> notify();<br /> SARAL SAXENAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01084233786047386880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8712770457197348465.post-3817261899790608612015-05-31T08:11:11.300-07:002015-05-31T08:11:11.300-07:00Hi Javin ,
Just want to add with respect to If y...Hi Javin , <br /><br />Just want to add with respect to If you're simply locking an object, I'd prefer to use synchronized<br /><br />Example:<br /><br />Lock.acquire();<br />doSomethingNifty(); // Throws a NPE!<br />Lock.release(); // Oh noes, we never release the lock!<br />You have to explicitly do try{} finally{} everywhere.<br /><br />Whereas with synchronized, it's super clear SARAL SAXENAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01084233786047386880noreply@blogger.com