Would this work as an implementation?
private void waitForAll(Future<Object>[] futures) {
for (Future<Object> future : futures) {
try {
future.get();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
break;
} catch (Exception ignored) {
}
}
}
The InterruptedException means the main user thread was interrupted,
which normally mean the application is shutting down. The other
ignored exceptions are caused when the invocation threw an exception
or was canceled.
-dain
On Aug 5, 2008, at 11:37 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Aug 5, 2008, at 5:23 AM, Karan Malhi wrote:
Question:- What would be the use-case to call an asynchronous
method and
expect synchronous behavior?
Not *an* asynchronous method (singular) but *multiple* asynchronous
methods (plural). Do methods A, B, and C in parallel and wait for
them to complete before continuing. The asynchronous methods could
each be doing a web service call, for example, that gather data
needed to start the real work.
It's essentially what you could do on your own with a CountDownLatch
but cannot do reliably as you are not in control of the threads or
even the method execution. Passing a CountDownLatch as a parameter
to the asynchronous methods you call and having the methods
themselves call latch.countDown() isn't going to work as the
container can throw exceptions before and after a bean method call.
You have no easy way of knowing if the bean method called countDown().
-David
