We should be good. UnmodifiableSet + iterator are just a wrappers and HashSet is thread-safe for read-only usage. They're now populated in the constructor as local variables, so outside the constructor no one has a reference to them.
If we revert back to the code where the hashsets are exposed, then we should probably use a CopyOnWriteArraySet as you suggest. -David On May 12, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you guarantee me unmodifiableSet itertors are thread safe i'm happy > otherwise please use a copyonwriteset then it'll not say anything more > Le 12 mai 2013 20:15, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> Looked into that this morning. >> >> It occurred to me that would definitely make it thread-safe, but alone >> doesn't give us the right logic for AnnotatedType.getMethods(), etc. which >> are supposed to return a complete list not a list being updated. So we'd >> still need to block getMethods() calls until initialization is complete. >> >> Updated the code again. Have a look and let me know if you see any more >> holes :) The lists not being thread safe was definitely accurate. >> >> >> -David >> >> On May 11, 2013, at 11:49 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I keep my comment/explanation on it, if you want it thread safe at >> runtime >>> convert it to sthg thread safe...copyonwriteXXX structures will be >> enough. >>> We dont need what you did IMO >>> Le 12 mai 2013 00:04, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit >> : >>> >>>> >>>> On May 11, 2013, at 1:59 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> That being said, I'll see if I can reduce the memory requirement of the >>>> fix. >>>> >>>> Done. Managed to reduce the memory requirement of the original code for >>>> the lazy case as well. Basically two object references lighter (128 >> bits). >>>> >>>> Thread-safe, lighter and slightly more immutable. >>>> >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >> >>
