[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OGNL-49?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13293921#comment-13293921 ]
Simone Tripodi commented on OGNL-49: ------------------------------------ while applying the patch, the {{patch}} command refuses 16 changes, maybe because of the {{OgnlRuntime}} class evolvement - can you please double check? TIA, -Simo > "Double-checked locking" anti-pattern in OgnlRuntime > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: OGNL-49 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OGNL-49 > Project: Commons OGNL > Issue Type: Bug > Environment: java version "1.6.0_31" > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_31-b04) > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 20.6-b01, mixed mode) > Reporter: Matt Whitlock > Assignee: Simone Tripodi > Priority: Critical > Attachments: > 0001-ognl-avoid-double-checked-locking-anti-pattern-in-Og.patch > > > OgnlRuntime in OGNL 3.0.5 has several occurrences of the "double-checked > locking" anti-pattern. This has already manifested in our product in the form > of: > ognl.MethodFailedException: Method "xxx" failed for object yyy > [java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: x.y.z.C.getFoo(java.lang.String)] > But method x.y.z.C.getFoo(String) does exist, and in fact the same OGNL > expression evaluates correctly when it is tried again subsequently. > There are 11 occurrences of double-checked locking in OgnlRuntime that must > be corrected. The simplest approach is to remove the unsynchronized accesses > to the guarded structures. A better approach would be to use ReadWriteLocks. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira