Re: svn commit: r769734 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: Mark Thomas wrote: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: As I mentioned in the bug report, what is the benefit of this? General best practise - no particular bug. Note the full proposed patch was bad. Bad practice would be to change an API, based on a report for general practice. It doesn't nothing but clutter the the SVN history for real bugs next time I will veto changes like this since what one considers best practice really merits to nothing, as it is a personal opinion and nothing technical. Then we disagree. I think encapsulation is a key element of good, modular software design with many technical arguments for its benefits. Whilst patches for bugs do have more immediate and obvious benefit, I don't think we should reject patches that improve the overall quality of the code, even if they don't fix actual bugs. I agree than when best practice gets as far as naming conventions, use of whitespace for indenting, line length and other coding style issues then you are into the realm of personal opinion and with a few notable exceptions (such as converting tabs to spaces) then there is little to be gained. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r769734 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
As I mentioned in the bug report, what is the benefit of this?
Filip
ma...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markt
Date: Wed Apr 29 10:22:00 2009
New Revision: 769734
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=769734view=rev
Log:
Reduce scope - partial application of patch by Jens Kapitza from bug 46999
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java?rev=769734r1=769733r2=769734view=diff
==
--- tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
(original)
+++ tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
Wed Apr 29 10:22:00 2009
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
*/
public class ThreadPoolExecutor extends
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor {
-final AtomicInteger activeCount = new AtomicInteger(0);
+private final AtomicInteger activeCount = new AtomicInteger(0);
public ThreadPoolExecutor(int corePoolSize, int maximumPoolSize, long keepAliveTime, TimeUnit unit, BlockingQueueRunnable workQueue, RejectedExecutionHandler handler) {
super(corePoolSize, maximumPoolSize, keepAliveTime, unit, workQueue,
handler);
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@
super.execute(command);
} catch (RejectedExecutionException rx) {
if (super.getQueue() instanceof TaskQueue) {
-TaskQueue queue = (TaskQueue)super.getQueue();
+final TaskQueue queue = (TaskQueue)super.getQueue();
try {
if (!queue.force(command, timeout, unit)) {
throw new RejectedExecutionException(Queue capacity is
full.);
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@
}
}
-static class RejectHandler implements java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionHandler {
+private static class RejectHandler implements
java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionHandler {
public void rejectedExecution(Runnable r,
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor executor) {
throw new RejectedExecutionException();
}
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r769734 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: As I mentioned in the bug report, what is the benefit of this? General best practise - no particular bug. Note the full proposed patch was bad. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r769734 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/threads/ThreadPoolExecutor.java
Mark Thomas wrote: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: As I mentioned in the bug report, what is the benefit of this? General best practise - no particular bug. Note the full proposed patch was bad. Bad practice would be to change an API, based on a report for general practice. It doesn't nothing but clutter the the SVN history for real bugs next time I will veto changes like this since what one considers best practice really merits to nothing, as it is a personal opinion and nothing technical. Filip Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
