4 ms·
The "core collections" - a term you're defining yourself right now however you like, for the record - aren't threadsafe for a reason. They have different perfor
by badgar 14y ago
The "core collections" - a term you're defining yourself right now however you like, for the record - aren't threadsafe for a reason. They have different performance characteristics in Java! You need two versions of the collections in these languages because of their concurrency and memory models.
In Java, using Concurrent/Atomic classes is how you write idiomatic threadsafe code, and it has been for a decade. Bitching because the main list types aren't threadsafe only demonstrates deep, deep ignorance.
- masklinn 14y agoWow, you went way off kilter there mate, I didn't "bitch because the main list types aren't threadsafe", in fact I didn't even emit the slightest criticism (let alone "bitch") on that front as it makes perfect sense, you're the guy getting all butthurt because I note in passing that Java's or C#'s core collections are no safer than Ruby's if you're using them in a stupid manner. Chill and lay off the exclamation point.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]