Is there no better way of waiting rather than using the Thread.sleep(n) method, I think you will agree that using sleep isn't the most elegant way to do things.
I did run the patch without sleep, and it executed perfectly well - just curious about the use of Thread.sleep(n) in general, nothing specific to this change itself. When should/can it be used and when not? Cheers, mani On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 12:28 AM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>wrote: > On 8/04/2013 9:59 PM, Mani Sarkar wrote: > >> Thanks Alan, David for your feedback. >> >> So effectively you are saying the Thread.sleep(10) is fine in the test >> and does not need to be re-written using any of the concurrency library >> methods. >> > > As I wrote back in one of my earliest emails: > > "that aside the latch is not needed. The fork() method starts a thread and > joins it. So when createNoise() returns we already know for certain that > the "noise has been created". What the sleep is doing is giving the GC a > chance to run. " > > The sleep has nothing to do with synchronizing with the "noise" thread. > And synchronization with the "noise" thread is already handled perfectly > correctly. > > David > ----- > > >> -- *Twitter:* @theNeomatrix369 *Blog:* http://neomatrix369.wordpress.com *JUG activity:* LJC Advocate (@adoptopenjdk & @adoptajsr programs) *Meet-a-Project:* https://github.com/MutabilityDetector *Devoxx UK 2013 was a grand success:* http://www.devoxx.com/display/UK13/Home *Don't chase success, rather aim for "Excellence", and success will come chasing after you!*
