[concurrency-interest] Parametric Initialization On Demand Holder Idiom ?

Joe Bowbeer joe.bowbeer at gmail.com
Fri Aug 31 02:18:07 EDT 2007

On 8/30/07, Hanson Char <hanson.char at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/30/07, Joe Bowbeer <joe.bowbeer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is OK for super-safe values like String.  Immutable objects with
> > all fields final do not require safe publication.  In general,
> > thread-safe values do require safe publication.
> Agree.  However, is it possible to contrive an example where a
> thread-safe (but not super-safe like  immutable) value passed to the
> SomethingMore.getInstance(params) would cause a
> surprising/unexpected/corrupted/partially-initialized result ?

Now I think this is a safe construction.  The key is that
SomethingMore.value is final.

private final Object value;



More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list