> "Greatly discourages sharing" seems like a bit of an over-statement. > The Java programming language provides well-defined methods of sharing > data between threads, and the Java memory model rigorously defines > what is and isn't expected to work. (Or were you referring to > something else?)
I was referring to the fact that the Android app model makes most of that stuff useless, since virtually all communications between threads is via Intents, Messages, et al, vs actually sharing memory. On Oct 8, 3:17 pm, fadden <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 8, 3:57 am, DanH <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Well, I would hope that the Java threadsafe classes are still > > threadsafe. But essentially none of the UI is, and the structure of > > the system greatly discourages sharing data between threads. > > Allowing multiple threads direct access to UI state causes a lot of > pain (every data structure needs to be synchronized, lots of > opportunities for races and funky timing issues). You really want the > UI to be single-threaded. > > "Greatly discourages sharing" seems like a bit of an over-statement. > The Java programming language provides well-defined methods of sharing > data between threads, and the Java memory model rigorously defines > what is and isn't expected to work. (Or were you referring to > something else?) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
