We only modify the array reference. A new array is created whenever it is modified so volatile is correct here.
Ralph > On Apr 21, 2014, at 6:42 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Which brings up another issue with markers. In MarkerManager, we have a > volatile array of Markers. Here's the message from IntelliJ: > > Reports array fields which are declared as volatile. Such fields may be > confusing, as accessing the array itself follows the rules for volatile > fields, but accessing the array's contents does not. If such volatile access > is needed to array contents, the JDK5.0 java.util.concurrent.atomic classes > should be used instead. > > Is this relevant here? > > >> On 21 April 2014 19:37, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >> 1) that would be my bad. I usually replace those with foreach loops where >> possible. It's usually good to comment in those cases. I'll revert that and >> comment. >> >> 2) that makes more sense than the exception >> >> >>> On 21 April 2014 18:46, Bruce Brouwer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I saw that some small changes were being made to the Markers. I had a few >>> thoughts regarding them: >>> >>> 1) Use of array iterator instead of indexed for loop. >>> for (Marker marker : localParents) >>> instead of >>> for (int i = 0; i < localParents.length; i++) >>> >>> When I was doing my performance benchmarks, I was finding the latter to be >>> faster. I'm guessing this is simply because a new Iterable object needs to >>> be created to iterate over the array. >>> >>> For most methods, such as add, remove, this was not a big deal. But for the >>> isInstanceOf and checkParent methods, we want those to be as fast as >>> possible. >>> >>> 2) isInstanceOf(String markerName) >>> Instead of throwing an IllegalArgumentException when a marker of name >>> markerName doesn't exist, why don't we simply return false? I don't want an >>> IllegalArgumentException to happen because I'm testing a markerName. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Bruce Brouwer >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
