I would have preferred a Concurrent* version for our data structures, but I can happily live with the synchronized version even if not the top.
an initial quick implementation is done and already on SVN - I took few minutes to make it - so please check it out and and feel free to add improvements, I am still working on it. best, -Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Marco Speranza <marcospera...@apache.org> wrote: >> Sorry but at first reading it was not clear to me what you meant, >> reading the second time I thought you maybe intended the >> <http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Collections.html#synchronizedCollection(java.util.Collection)> >> related for [graph]? > > Yes Simo... I meant just what. I think that this patter is the best choice. > >> if yes, why should it be put in a separated class? the existing entry >> point sounds be more than enough for hosting that methods. > > you are right so if you agreed I can work on that. > > Ciao > > > -- > Marco Speranza <marcospera...@apache.org> > Google Code: http://code.google.com/u/marco.speranza79/ > > Il giorno 02/mar/2012, alle ore 21:34, Simone Tripodi ha scritto: > >>> I think that we can create a class Graphs that has static methods to wrap >>> [graph] in a thread-safe way. >>> So the user can choose the preferred implementation. >> >> Sorry but at first reading it was not clear to me what you meant, >> reading the second time I thought you maybe intended the >> <http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Collections.html#synchronizedCollection(java.util.Collection)> >> related for [graph]? >> >> if yes, why should it be put in a separated class? the existing entry >> point sounds be more than enough for hosting that methods. >> >> Anyway, since I broke it I am going to fix it, I just need few minutes. >> >> best, >> -Simo >> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>> Hola Marco, >>> >>>> Yep I think that [graph] has to be not thread safe, because if a user uses >>>> [graph] in a not multi-thread environment the synchronization is not >>>> needed and the performance degrade. >>> >>> given the fact that myself at first place wouldn't ever use these data >>> structure in a production environment, how many chances we do have, in >>> the era of web applications, that users work in a single threaded >>> environment? >>> >>>> I think that we can create a class Graphs that has static methods to wrap >>>> [graph] in a thread-safe way. >>>> So the user can choose the preferred implementation. >>> >>> uhm, not sure this is the best pattern to apply :) >>> >>>> I'm working on a patch. If you agree I can create a patch to explain my >>>> idea. >>>> >>> >>> better rolling back the commit and mark classes not thread safe - I'll >>> create separated Concurrent* implementations. >>> >>> Thanks for reviewing! >>> -Simo >>> >>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >>> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
