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 8199265
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 7, 20262026-06-07T06:08:05+00:00 2026-06-07T06:08:05+00:00

Suppose I have the following: public class Foo { private ReadingList mReadingList = new

  • 0

Suppose I have the following:

public class Foo {
    private ReadingList mReadingList = new ReadingList();

    public ReadingList getReadingList() {
        synchronized (mReadingList) {
            return mReadingList;
        }
    }
}

If I try modifying the ReadingList object in two threads, the synchronization above won’t help me, right?:

// Thread 1
foo1.getReadingList().setName("aaa");

// Thread 2
foo2.getReadingList().setName("bbb");

do I have to wrap each method I want synchronized like so:

public class Foo {
    private ReadingList mReadingList = new ReadingList();

    public synchronized void setReadingListName(String name) {
        mReadingList.setName(name);
    }

    public synchronized void setReadingListAuthor(String author) {
        mReadingList.setAuthor(author);
    }

    ...

and so on for each method of ReadingList I want exposed and synched? I’d end up just writing wrapper methods for each method of ReadingList.

Thanks

  • 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
    2026-06-07T06:08:07+00:00Added an answer on June 7, 2026 at 6:08 am

    1. You have access to the ReadingList source

    If you have access to the ReadingList object, add synchronized to all of the methods of ReadingList if you desire synchronized access to all of the fields or a certain group of setters if you only wish to interleave access to certain fields.

    2. You do not have access to ReadingList

    You would have to write something like:

    public class Foo {
        private ReadingList mReadingList = new ReadingList();
    
        public void setReadingListName(String name) {
            synchronized(mReadingList) {
               mReadingList.setName(name);
            }
        }
    
        public void setReadingListAuthor(String author) {
            synchronized(mReadingList) {
               mReadingList.setAuthor(author);
            }
        }
    
        ...
    

    3. Use a general purpose lock object

    Depending on the nature of Foo and how general-purpose this whole thing is, you may find that only a certain class or classes present the threading issue in ReadingList.

    In such a class you could use a general purpose lock object:

    public class Bar {
       Object readingListLock = new Object();
    
       public void someMethodThatModifiesReading() {
          synchronized(readingListLock) {
              foo.getReadingList().setName("1");
          }
       }
    
       public void someOtherMethodThatModifiesReading() {
          synchronized(readingListLock) {
              foo.getReadingList().setName("2");
          }
       }
    
       ...
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Suppose I have the following class: public class Foo { private List<Integer> list =
Suppose I have the following class: public class Foo { public Bar bar; }
suppose I have the following class: class MyInteger { private: int n_; public: MyInteger(int
Suppose I have the following service object public class UserService { @Autowired private UserDao
Suppose I have the following: public class MyObject { public string Name {get; set;}
Suppose I have following code package memoryleak; public class MemoryLeak { public static int
Suppose, I have following classes: public class DisposableObj : IDisposable { public ChildObj CreateObj();
Suppose I have the following (trivially simple) base class: public class Simple { public
Say suppose I have the following Java code. public class Example { public static
Suppose I have the following class: class Camera { public Camera( double exposure, double

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.