On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Roman Kennke <ro...@kennke.org> wrote: > Hi Olegm > >> Looks fine for me. > > Cool. I take it, I have to wait for another reviewer, or can I push it > now? What are the exact rules for this?
I'm afraid, I can not be counted as official reviewer, and you have to wait someone from AWT team to review the code :( Oleg. > > /Roman > >> >> Oleg. >> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Roman Kennke <ro...@kennke.org> wrote: >> > Hi Oleg, >> > >> >> >> I'd synchronized setting/getting of access field. And (perhaps) I'd >> >> >> only allow >> >> >> set this field once. >> >> > >> >> > Good ideas. I implemented both suggestions. Webrev is updated at the >> >> > same URL. >> >> >> >> As far as I can see you add synchronization only to setter, but you >> >> should also add >> >> synchronization when you read this field. So you should either make >> >> access field >> >> volatile, or add synchronized getter and use it to get the field. >> > >> > Duh, you are right. I should better think twice before I send new >> > patch :-). Now it should be correct, what do you think? >> > >> > Webrev still here: http://kennke.org/~roman/componentaccess/webrev/ >> > >> > /Roman >> > >> > -- >> > http://kennke.org/blog/ >> > > -- > http://kennke.org/blog/ >
