On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 4:01 AM Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 5/15/21 6:50 PM, Peter Levart wrote: > > What if I wanted to create and start a thread that would be "pristine" - > > not have any ScopeLocal value bound? Is this intentionally not allowed > > in order to make sure that inheritable ScopeLocal(s) can't be cleared by > > code that has no access to ScopeLocal instance(s)? > > That one is about to be changed by a revision to the JEP. There clearly > is a need to control whether a newly-created thread inherits scope locals > or not. For instance, an Executor might lazily create worker threads, and > we don't want them to inherit scope locals from the thread that was > running. > Turning this around, I would argue that there are few (or perhaps *no*) cases where it would ever be desirable to inherit scope locals across thread creation; in cases where this is explicitly desired, one can always resume the snapshot from within the thread's Runnable. Was there a particular use case this was meant to address? -- - DML • he/him
