RE: [cp-patches] Thread.sleep() update

[Jeroen Frijters]

Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 15:53 +0100, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
> > I don't like this "fix", in particular it breaks 
> compatibility with Sun.
> > On the JDK Thread.Sleep(0) is equivalent to a yield() (i.e. 
> it doesn't
> > throw an InterruptedException, even if an interrupt is pending).
> 
> Interesting. That was not how I would interpret the behavour 
> of sleep().
> Are you sure this isn't a bug in that JDK implementation? It 
> is kind of confusing that Thread.sleep() not always throws an 
> InterruptedException when the Thread actually was interrupted.
> Do you have any documentation that supports this?

It isn't spec'ed this way. I actually think it is a Windows peculiarity
that shines through.

> > Can't the broken VMs just fix their VMThread.sleep?
> 
> If you say that sleep(0) should call yield() then we should 
> probably do that instead of checking whether the Thread was
> interrupted() to make the VMThread interface as simple as possible.

I would be in favor of letting the VM implementer decide such things.
Thread.sleep(0) is by it's very nature a very platform specific thing to
do. I don't think that Thread.sleep() should be messing with the
arguments at all. Making things "simpler" is often not worth it in the
long run.

Regards,
Jeroen