David, Mandy, Mark, Roger, Thanks for your feedback. I understand that ‘stackSize’ is rarely used, but to avoid having to provide more than one additional constructor I opted to keep it. If someone really wants to create a Thread with a specific stack size and not inherit initial inheritable thread-local values, then they can. As was said, this will not be that commonly used.
I’ll finalise this as is, unless there are any objections. -Chris. On 9 Dec 2015, at 16:58, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > 2015/12/8 5:36 -0800, david.hol...@oracle.com: >> On 9/12/2015 12:15 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8056152/00/webrev/ >> >> Addition to Thread looks good to me. >> >> I vote in favor of maintaining consistency of the existing Thread >> construction patterns. Builders or whatever can be added later as a >> separate RFE if considered desirable. > > I agree -- the new constructor is a bit wordy, with five parameters, but > this is unlikely to be used all that broadly. Introducing an entirely > new way to create threads, with a fluent builder API or whatever, can > come later. > > - Mark
