class Test116 { static final StringBuffer sb1 = new StringBuffer(); static final StringBuffer sb2 = new StringBuffer(); public static void main(String args[]) { new Thread() { public void run() { synchronized(sb1) { sb1.append("A"); sb2.append("B"); } } }.start(); new Thread() { public void run() { synchronized(sb1) { sb1.append("C"); sb2.append("D"); } } }.start(); /* Line 28 */ System.out.println (sb1 + " " + sb2); } }
add this code after line 28:
try { Thread.sleep(5000); } catch(InterruptedException e) { }
and you have some chance of predicting the outcome.
Option B is wrong. notify() - wakes up a single thread that is waiting on this object's monitor.
Option C is wrong. notifyAll() - wakes up all threads that are waiting on this object's monitor.
Option D is wrong. Typically, releasing a lock means the thread holding the lock (in other words, the thread currently in the synchronized method) exits the synchronized method. At that point, the lock is free until some other thread enters a synchronized method on that object. Does entering/exiting synchronized code mean that the thread execution stops? Not necessarily because the thread can still run code that is not synchronized. I think the word directly in the question gives us a clue. Exiting synchronized code does not directly stop the execution of a thread.
public class Test107 implements Runnable { private int x; private int y; public static void main(String args[]) { Test107 that = new Test107(); (new Thread(that)).start(); (new Thread(that)).start(); } public synchronized void run() { for(int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { x++; y++; System.out.println("x = " + x + ", y = " + y); /* Line 17 */ } } }
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " x = " + x + ", y = " + y);
String x = new String("xyz"); String y = "abc"; x = x + y;How many String objects have been created?
public class SqrtExample { public static void main(String [] args) { double value = -9.0; System.out.println( Math.sqrt(value)); } }
(3), (4), and (5) are not legal Thread constructors, although (4) is close. If you reverse the arguments in (4), you'd have a valid constructor.
String x = "xyz"; x.toUpperCase(); /* Line 2 */ String y = x.replace('Y', 'y'); y = y + "abc"; System.out.println(y);
public class SwitchTest { public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println("value =" + switchIt(4)); } public static int switchIt(int x) { int j = 1; switch (x) { case l: j++; case 2: j++; case 3: j++; case 4: j++; case 5: j++; default: j++; } return j + x; } }
public class If2 { static boolean b1, b2; public static void main(String [] args) { int x = 0; if ( !b1 ) /* Line 7 */ { if ( !b2 ) /* Line 9 */ { b1 = true; x++; if ( 5 > 6 ) { x++; } if ( !b1 ) x = x + 10; else if ( b2 = true ) /* Line 19 */ x = x + 100; else if ( b1 | b2 ) /* Line 21 */ x = x + 1000; } } System.out.println(x); } }
public class A { void A() /* Line 3 */ { System.out.println("Class A"); } public static void main(String[] args) { new A(); } }
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.