On 13 December 2011 20:25, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 13/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
>> I've added some Javadoc to classes to indicate which ones are supposed
>> to be thread-safe and which are not.
>>
>> AFAICT, there remain 2 classes to be dealt with, ie
>>
>> GenericKeyedObjectPool (GKOP)
>> and
>>
On Dec 13, 2011, at 15:50, sebb wrote:
> On 13 December 2011 20:25, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> On 13/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
>>> I've added some Javadoc to classes to indicate which ones are supposed
>>> to be thread-safe and which are not.
>>>
>>> AFAICT, there remain 2 classes to be dealt with,
On 13 December 2011 20:25, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 13/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
>> I've added some Javadoc to classes to indicate which ones are supposed
>> to be thread-safe and which are not.
>>
>> AFAICT, there remain 2 classes to be dealt with, ie
>>
>> GenericKeyedObjectPool (GKOP)
>> and
>>
On 13/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
> I've added some Javadoc to classes to indicate which ones are supposed
> to be thread-safe and which are not.
>
> AFAICT, there remain 2 classes to be dealt with, ie
>
> GenericKeyedObjectPool (GKOP)
> and
> GenericObjectPool (GOP)
>
> GKOP is not currently thr
I've added some Javadoc to classes to indicate which ones are supposed
to be thread-safe and which are not.
AFAICT, there remain 2 classes to be dealt with, ie
GenericKeyedObjectPool (GKOP)
and
GenericObjectPool (GOP)
GKOP is not currently thread-safe, as there are several mutable
variables that