patternjavaCritical
Why is Java Vector (and Stack) class considered obsolete or deprecated?
Viewed 0 times
javawhyandclassconsidereddeprecatedvectorstackobsolete
Problem
Why is Java Vector considered a legacy class, obsolete or deprecated?
Isn't its use valid when working with concurrency?
And if I don't want to manually synchronize objects and just want to use a thread-safe collection without needing to make fresh copies of the underlying array (as
What about
Isn't its use valid when working with concurrency?
And if I don't want to manually synchronize objects and just want to use a thread-safe collection without needing to make fresh copies of the underlying array (as
CopyOnWriteArrayList does), then is it fine to use Vector?What about
Stack, which is a subclass of Vector, what should I use instead of it?Solution
Vector synchronizes on each individual operation. That's almost never what you want to do.Generally you want to synchronize a whole sequence of operations. Synchronizing individual operations is both less safe (if you iterate over a
Vector, for instance, you still need to take out a lock to avoid anyone else changing the collection at the same time, which would cause a ConcurrentModificationException in the iterating thread) but also slower (why take out a lock repeatedly when once will be enough)?Of course, it also has the overhead of locking even when you don't need to.
Basically, it's a very flawed approach to synchronization in most situations. As Mr Brian Henk pointed out, you can decorate a collection using the calls such as
Collections.synchronizedList - the fact that Vector combines both the "resized array" collection implementation with the "synchronize every operation" bit is another example of poor design; the decoration approach gives cleaner separation of concerns.As for a
Stack equivalent - I'd look at Deque/ArrayDeque to start with.Context
Stack Overflow Q#1386275, score: 733
Revisions (0)
No revisions yet.