Doron Cohen wrote:
For obtain(timeout), to prevent waiting too long you could compute the
maximum number of times that obtain() can be executed (assuming, as in
current code, that obtain() executes in no time). Then break if either it
was executed sufficiently many times or if time is up. I don't
Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 9/21/06, Michael McCandless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyway, my first reaction was to change this to use
System.currentTimeMillis() to measure elapsed time, but then I
remembered is a dangerous approach because whenever the clock on the
machine is updated (eg by a time-s
For obtain(timeout), to prevent waiting too long you could compute the
maximum number of times that obtain() can be executed (assuming, as in
current code, that obtain() executes in no time). Then break if either it
was executed sufficiently many times or if time is up. I don't see how to
prevent w
On 9/21/06, Michael McCandless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyway, my first reaction was to change this to use
System.currentTimeMillis() to measure elapsed time, but then I
remembered is a dangerous approach because whenever the clock on the
machine is updated (eg by a time-sync NTP client) it wo
