[concurrency-interest] Attempt at yet another mostly-concurrent result cache

Holger Hoffstätte holger at wizards.de
Tue Jan 9 05:51:27 EST 2007

Brian Goetz wrote:
>>     // SYNC1
>>     synchronized (batch)
> At this point, isn't batch still null?  You can't sync on a null object...

Nope, that's what putIfAbsent + flipping the method-local takes care of in
both places. At least that's the intention :)


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list