On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:19:04 GMT, Robert Lichtenberger <rlich...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> By using the collection itself as synchronization lock we achieve behaviour > that matches java.util.Collections classes. > > I've create test cases that fail with the current way of synchronizing on a > separate object. > > I've removed unused constructors. > > ---------------- > > Commits: > - 7e80839f: 8232524: SynchronizedObservableMap cannot be be protected for > copying/iterating > - 8ecf3545: JDK-8232524 fixed. > > Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/17/files > Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/jfx/17/webrev.00 > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232524 > Stats: 120 lines in 2 files changed: 95 ins; 17 del; 8 mod > Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/17.diff > Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx pull/17/head:pull/17 You have many whitespace errors in your patch that will need to be fixed before `git jcheck` will pass. When you fix them, you can just push a new commit. As an aside, you have uncovered a bug in the Skara PR bot where the server-side jcheck fails to complete if there are more than 50 errors. See [SKARA-135](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-135). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/17
