I actually have a question about using locks vs synchronized declaration. When you convert java to C# there will come a moment you will have to convert a synchronized method. So you have two options either you slap a lock(this) around the method's code, or you declare the method synchronized. This results in different IL code. The first will result in a monitor + exception handling code, while the latter will actually result in an IL "synchronized" annotation.
If you run the Java-to-C# converter it will do the first, if you run j# it will do the latter. Jeff Richter in his framework book or in some article, suggests never to use the declarative approach, as you may "forget" that it is actually there. I can feel for that, and there are other reason why the explicit use of monitors may be better. What I would like to know is whether there are any semantic differences (at IL level) between an "synchronized" annotated method and a method whose complete implementation is guarded by a monitor. -- Werner
