On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 04:09:18 GMT, Abhishek Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What's the benefit of removing synchronized from the get call? > > As I mentioned earlier, `ICONS_MAP` are initialized only in **static block** > and after that it is just referenced to access the value out of it. Even > though `ICONS_MAP` are accessed simultaneously for read operation by multiple > threads, it won't lead to any inconsistent state. So, the use of Synchronized > look unnecessary to me and the removal of Synchronized shouldn't affect the > object state in multi threaded environment. I agree with @turbanoff's evaluation in [the bug description](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8308588#descriptionmodule): <q cite="https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8308588#descriptionmodule";>As this map is read-only and _all its content is initialized in `clinit`_, we can safely remove `synchronized` from `get` call</q>. We may go further and make `ICONS_MAP` unmodifiable map: Map<String,GTKStockIcon> iconsMap = new HashMap<>(); iconsMap.put("FileChooser.cancelIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-cancel", 4)); iconsMap.put("FileChooser.okIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-ok", 4)); iconsMap.put("OptionPane.yesIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-yes", 4)); iconsMap.put("OptionPane.noIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-no", 4)); iconsMap.put("OptionPane.cancelIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-cancel", 4)); iconsMap.put("OptionPane.okIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-ok", 4)); ICONS_MAP = Collections.unmodifiableMap(iconsMap); This guarantees that `ICONS_MAP` cannot be modified; additionally the map is fully initialised by the time it's assigned to `ICONS_MAP` member. Alternatively, as IDEA suggests, `Map.of` can be used instead: ICONS_MAP = Map.of( "FileChooser.cancelIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-cancel", 4), "FileChooser.okIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-ok", 4), "OptionPane.yesIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-yes", 4), "OptionPane.noIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-no", 4), "OptionPane.cancelIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-cancel", 4), "OptionPane.okIcon", new GTKStockIcon("gtk-ok", 4)); ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20741#issuecomment-2317527619
