>
> If we want a map that is both synchronized and observable, then yes. In
> any case, I don't see any value in trying to eliminate it from the API
> (e.g., through deprecation --> deprecation for removal --> removal).
One could do this:
protected Map criteriaLock =
Collections.synchronizedMap(
Hi Robert,
1. Is the behavior of SynchronizedObservableMap a bug, where it uses a
new mutex and doesn't synchronize on itself a bug?
I'd say yes, this is a bug. Clearly the class is meant to mimic the
corresponding Collections class with observability added. The fact that
it then doesn't syn
I've just stumbled upon a devious detail in
javafx.collections.FXCollections.SynchronizedObservableMap. Although
it almost looks like a twin of Collections.synchronizedMap it does not
allow to protect copying or iterating over it the way
Collections.synchronizedMap does.
Example program:
import ja
