Correct synchronization guard in groupByUntil#877
Merged
benjchristensen merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:masterfrom Feb 14, 2014
Merged
Correct synchronization guard in groupByUntil#877benjchristensen merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:masterfrom
benjchristensen merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:masterfrom
Conversation
Can't see how `synchronized (key) { ... }` could have been correct here; `key` will hardly ever be the same instance for different invocations of `keySelector`, and the comment on line 73 clearly states `gate` to be the guard for `map`.
Member
|
Nice catch. |
|
RxJava-pull-requests #809 SUCCESS |
benjchristensen
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 14, 2014
Correct synchronization guard in groupByUntil
jihoonson
pushed a commit
to jihoonson/RxJava
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2020
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Can't see how
synchronized (key) { ... }could have been correct here;keywill hardly ever be the same instance for different invocations ofkeySelector, and the comment on line 73 clearly statesgateto be the guard formap.