To me this is less bad than having the coordination hang around for who-
knows- how- long in a ThreadLocal (or similar), but tastes may vary.
> I've created an OSGi issue to clarify whether below snippet is supposed
> to always work and after discussing this with BJ, that code is bound to
> fail as there is no strong reference to the coordination. The spec and
> the CT hint that the thread local (or equivalent construct) which holds
> the coordination in the implementation must be a weak reference.
> Therefore with the example below, no one is holding a strong reference
> to the coordination which then allows it to be garbage collected.
>
> Regards
> Carsten
>
> Am 31.07.15 um 04:48 schrieb Carsten Ziegeler:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Christian brought up an interesting scenario for using the coordinator.
>> The question is, if the following is a valid scenario:
>>
>> coordinator.begin("test", 0);
>> System.gc();
>> coordinator.pop().end();
>>
>> (Of course no one will do a gc() call in his code, its just for
>> demonstrational purposes)
>>
>> The coordination is bound to the thread, but no reference is held.
>>
>> Should the coordination be garbage collected? Looking at the CT it
>> seems, the answer is yes.
>>
>> Regards
>> Carsten
>>
>
>
> --
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Adobe Research Switzerland
> cziege...@apache.org
> _______________________________________________
> OSGi Developer Mail List
> osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
>
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
