[Bug 74] fixed concurrentModificationExceptions for Synchronized EList's #204
Conversation
AlsoBy: Erdal Karaca <erdal.karaca.de@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Frank Gasdorf <fgdrf@users.sourceforge.net>
|
Issue tracker reference: |
|
Correct issue at LocationTech bugzilla instance : https://locationtech.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=74 |
|
Hudson job for pull request finished successfully and two additional tests passed (https://hudson.locationtech.org/udig/job/uDig-PR-NG/12/testReport/org.locationtech.udig.project.internal.impl/SynchronizedEObjectEListTest/) |
fgdrf
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2015
[Bug 74] fixed ConcurrentModificationExceptions for Synchronized EList's
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
EMF isn't thread safe and therefor its required to synchronize read and writes. Write access in uDig is synchroinzed using a Lock Object. But using an Iterator to read Elements of the list were not sychronized correctly.
In addition the javadoc indicated that users should synchronize on the list itself. If implemented this way synchronization is not consistent because the monitor is based on two different objects, the EList and the Lock Object. In result it causes ConcurrentModificationException's.
The pull request:
Many thanks to Erdal Karaca (@erdalkaraca) for the pair programming session!