Okay, thanks. Makes sense.
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 21:40 +0200, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> On May 11, 2009, at 9:15 PM, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
>
> > I'm thinking that the MultivalueMapImpl.getList method -- since it
> > exercises lazy initialization of the list -- should be synchronized.
> > Make sense?
> >
>
> No, because it is not designed to be a concurrent implementation. I do
> not recall there being a place in Jersey where an instance of
> MultivalueMapImpl is modified concurrently.
>
> I think the right thing to do is, if one requires an instance to be
> modified concurrently, to have a ConcurrentMultivaluedMapImpl
> implementation that adapts an instance of MultivaluedMap, which is
> similar to how the Java collections framework is designed.
>
> Paul.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_jersey.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_jersey.dev.java.net
>