On 19/06/2009, Xie Xiaodong <xxd82...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, I think line767 is still needed. You could turn to the last part of this
> article for reference: "
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel/DoubleCheckedLocking.html";.
Oops, my bad.
The code would still work, but it would sometimes create a new Date
unecessarily.
>
>
> 2009/6/19 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
>
>
> > On 19/06/2009, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Just spotted this duplicate code in AccessLogValve:
> > >
> > > 661: if (!dateStamp.equals(tsDate)) {
> > > 662: if (!dateStamp.equals(tsDate)) {
> > >
> > > Not sure this double-checked looking offers any benefit ;-)
> > >
> >
> > Line 767 is also no longer needed, as currentMillis is now volatile:
> >
> > 765: if ((systime - currentMillis) > 1000) {
> > 766: synchronized (this) {
> > 767: if ((systime - currentMillis) > 1000) {
> >
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Sincerely yours and Best Regards,
>
> Xie Xiaodong
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
