Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8066705
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 5, 20262026-06-05T12:05:27+00:00 2026-06-05T12:05:27+00:00

Let’s say I have a field that can be accessed by two separate threads.

  • 0

Let’s say I have a field that can be accessed by two separate threads. I’m using an Object for the synchronization lock. Can I check for null outside of the synchronization block? In other words, is this thread-safe:

private Object sharedObject() = new Object();
private final Object sharedObjectLock() = new Object();

private void awesomeMethod() {
   if(sharedObject != null) {
      synchronized(sharedObjectLock) {
         //code the uses sharedObject
      }
   }
}
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-05T12:05:28+00:00Added an answer on June 5, 2026 at 12:05 pm

    No. The assignment of the variable could occur after you check but before you get the lock.

    There was, at one time, a school of thought that synchronized locks were expensive, but that’s not true anymore. Just grab the lock.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Let me explain best with an example. Say you have node class that can
Let's say that I have a SQLite database that I create in a separate
Let's say I have a dataset, which can be neatly classified using weka's J48
Let's say we have a table that has 2 million rows. It has two
Let's say I have a table with a Color column. Color can have various
Let's say I have two tables orgs and states orgs is (o_ID, state_abbr) and
Let's say I have an facebook application running using the JS SDK. First user
Let's say I have the following object: var VariableName = { firstProperty: 1, secondProperty:
Let's say I have multiple requirements for a password. The first is that the
Let's say that I have a date in R and it's formatted as follows.

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.