在淘宝内网有位同事提了一个很好的问题,大家能否帮忙解答下?
在CopyOnWriteArrayList类的set方法中有一段setArray(elements)代码,实际上这段代码并未对elements做任何改动,实现的volatile语意并不对CopyOnWriteArrayList实例产生任何影响,为什么还是要保留这行语句?见以下代码红体部分:
01 |
/** The array, accessed only via getArray/setArray. */ |
02 |
private volatile transient Object[] array;
|
05 |
* Replaces the element at the specified position in this list with the
|
08 |
* @throws IndexOutOfBoundsException {@inheritDoc}
|
10 |
public E set( int index, E element) {
|
11 |
final ReentrantLock lock = this .lock;
|
14 |
Object[] elements = getArray();
|
15 |
E oldValue = get(elements, index);
|
17 |
if (oldValue != element) {
|
18 |
int len = elements.length;
|
19 |
Object[] newElements = Arrays.copyOf(elements, len);
|
20 |
newElements[index] = element;
|
21 |
setArray(newElements);
|
35 |
final void setArray(Object[] a) {
|
40 |
* Gets the array. Non-private so as to also be accessible
|
41 |
* from CopyOnWriteArraySet class.
|
43 |
final Object[] getArray() {
|
这个问题在concurrency-interest邮件列表里也有人讨论:
http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/2010-February/006886.html