Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Moved getLock() to AbstractServer, added ServiceLock verification thread #5145
Moved getLock() to AbstractServer, added ServiceLock verification thread #5145
Changes from 1 commit
27712b8
68ea277
67769b1
601aff5
d041327
744fa54
09ad5c2
c56c870
a3ce01d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you could avoid making this abstract and needing to implement it in the child classes if each child class called the super constructor and provided a
Supplier<ServiceLock>
, then this impl would just be:That might also avoid issues with handling null here, because the supplier would likely be blocking.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But wouldn't that require an AtomicReference or something so that the Supplier can just call AtomicReference.get() and the server call AtomicReference.set(). I'm not sure that's any cleaner.