On 5/15/21 6:50 PM, Peter Levart wrote: > What if I wanted to create and start a thread that would be "pristine" - > not have any ScopeLocal value bound? Is this intentionally not allowed > in order to make sure that inheritable ScopeLocal(s) can't be cleared by > code that has no access to ScopeLocal instance(s)?
That one is about to be changed by a revision to the JEP. There clearly is a need to control whether a newly-created thread inherits scope locals or not. For instance, an Executor might lazily create worker threads, and we don't want them to inherit scope locals from the thread that was running. -- Andrew Haley (he/him) Java Platform Lead Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com> https://keybase.io/andrewhaley EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
