Enforce printing sequence using wait() and notify()











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












This is a follow-up answer "implementation" to a question I posted on SO. For the sake of convenience, I will repeat my intent: I want one thread (called sub-thread) to print 10 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations; then another (boss-thread) to print 100 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations provided that sub-thread goes first. It will look something like this:



Sub Thread- iter = 1
Sub Thread- iter = 2
...
Sub Thread- iter = 10
Boss Thread- iter = 1
Boss Thread- iter = 2
...
Boss Thread- iter = 100


This sub-thread and boss-thread printing sequence will continue for 2 times (outer-loop).



Here's my code:



public class InterThCom {
// flag default to false for checking if sub-thread
// gets the lock first
private boolean isTh2RunFirst = false;

public static void main(String args) {
InterThCom itc = new InterThCom();

Thread t1 = new Thread(itc.new Th1(), "Boss-thread-");
Thread t2 = new Thread(itc.new Th2(), "Sub-thread-");

t1.start();
t2.start();
}

private class Th1 implements Runnable {

@Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
synchronized (InterThCom.class) { // lock up inner-loop

// boss-thread gets the lock first
// wait for sub-thread and let it run;
// otherwise, skip this check
if (isTh2RunFirst == false) {
// wait for sub-thread, if boss-thread gets the lock first
try {
InterThCom.class.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e1) {
e1.printStackTrace();
}
}

// print iteration 100 times
for (int j = 0; j < 100; j++) {
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
}
// done printing 100 times

// sub-thread should run already at this point
isTh2RunFirst = true;

// This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

// wake up sub-thread
InterThCom.class.notify();

// wait for sub-thread
try {
InterThCom.class.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
}

private class Th2 implements Runnable {

@Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
// print iteration 10 times
for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++) {
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
}
// done printing 10 times

// sub-thread already prints j iteration
isTh2RunFirst = true;

// This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

// wake up boss-thread
InterThCom.class.notify();

// wait for boss-thread
try {
InterThCom.class.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
// boss-thread is waiting at the last iteration, so wake it up
InterThCom.class.notify();
}
}
}

}


Things I would like help with:




  • Did I use "synchronized" block in an efficient way that aligns with conventional approach?



  • Are there other locking approach that will make my code less cluttered and cleaner?




    • My initial thought was using a separate class called PrintStmt to wrap all the statements inside the run and then called it in the run method then lock the invocation. That way, run only has the invocation and the lock.



  • Also, my wait and notify pairs are all over, is there a better way to "organize" them in a way that looks better? E.g. one of my notify call is outside of the double for-loop in the sub-thread Th2 class. This is an edge case but I am having trouble to integrate that inside the double-loops.


  • I am new to multi-threading. So, I am grateful for any other addresses and corrections to my implementation of the inter-communication for two threads with some extra requirement. Or other suggestions on implementing thread-communication will be appreciated.











share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 14 mins ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.



















    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite












    This is a follow-up answer "implementation" to a question I posted on SO. For the sake of convenience, I will repeat my intent: I want one thread (called sub-thread) to print 10 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations; then another (boss-thread) to print 100 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations provided that sub-thread goes first. It will look something like this:



    Sub Thread- iter = 1
    Sub Thread- iter = 2
    ...
    Sub Thread- iter = 10
    Boss Thread- iter = 1
    Boss Thread- iter = 2
    ...
    Boss Thread- iter = 100


    This sub-thread and boss-thread printing sequence will continue for 2 times (outer-loop).



    Here's my code:



    public class InterThCom {
    // flag default to false for checking if sub-thread
    // gets the lock first
    private boolean isTh2RunFirst = false;

    public static void main(String args) {
    InterThCom itc = new InterThCom();

    Thread t1 = new Thread(itc.new Th1(), "Boss-thread-");
    Thread t2 = new Thread(itc.new Th2(), "Sub-thread-");

    t1.start();
    t2.start();
    }

    private class Th1 implements Runnable {

    @Override
    public void run() {
    for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
    synchronized (InterThCom.class) { // lock up inner-loop

    // boss-thread gets the lock first
    // wait for sub-thread and let it run;
    // otherwise, skip this check
    if (isTh2RunFirst == false) {
    // wait for sub-thread, if boss-thread gets the lock first
    try {
    InterThCom.class.wait();
    } catch (InterruptedException e1) {
    e1.printStackTrace();
    }
    }

    // print iteration 100 times
    for (int j = 0; j < 100; j++) {
    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
    }
    // done printing 100 times

    // sub-thread should run already at this point
    isTh2RunFirst = true;

    // This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

    // wake up sub-thread
    InterThCom.class.notify();

    // wait for sub-thread
    try {
    InterThCom.class.wait();
    } catch (InterruptedException e) {
    e.printStackTrace();
    }
    }
    }
    }
    }

    private class Th2 implements Runnable {

    @Override
    public void run() {
    for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
    synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
    // print iteration 10 times
    for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++) {
    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
    }
    // done printing 10 times

    // sub-thread already prints j iteration
    isTh2RunFirst = true;

    // This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

    // wake up boss-thread
    InterThCom.class.notify();

    // wait for boss-thread
    try {
    InterThCom.class.wait();
    } catch (InterruptedException e) {
    e.printStackTrace();
    }
    }
    }
    synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
    // boss-thread is waiting at the last iteration, so wake it up
    InterThCom.class.notify();
    }
    }
    }

    }


    Things I would like help with:




    • Did I use "synchronized" block in an efficient way that aligns with conventional approach?



    • Are there other locking approach that will make my code less cluttered and cleaner?




      • My initial thought was using a separate class called PrintStmt to wrap all the statements inside the run and then called it in the run method then lock the invocation. That way, run only has the invocation and the lock.



    • Also, my wait and notify pairs are all over, is there a better way to "organize" them in a way that looks better? E.g. one of my notify call is outside of the double for-loop in the sub-thread Th2 class. This is an edge case but I am having trouble to integrate that inside the double-loops.


    • I am new to multi-threading. So, I am grateful for any other addresses and corrections to my implementation of the inter-communication for two threads with some extra requirement. Or other suggestions on implementing thread-communication will be appreciated.











    share|improve this question
















    bumped to the homepage by Community 14 mins ago


    This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.

















      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite











      This is a follow-up answer "implementation" to a question I posted on SO. For the sake of convenience, I will repeat my intent: I want one thread (called sub-thread) to print 10 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations; then another (boss-thread) to print 100 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations provided that sub-thread goes first. It will look something like this:



      Sub Thread- iter = 1
      Sub Thread- iter = 2
      ...
      Sub Thread- iter = 10
      Boss Thread- iter = 1
      Boss Thread- iter = 2
      ...
      Boss Thread- iter = 100


      This sub-thread and boss-thread printing sequence will continue for 2 times (outer-loop).



      Here's my code:



      public class InterThCom {
      // flag default to false for checking if sub-thread
      // gets the lock first
      private boolean isTh2RunFirst = false;

      public static void main(String args) {
      InterThCom itc = new InterThCom();

      Thread t1 = new Thread(itc.new Th1(), "Boss-thread-");
      Thread t2 = new Thread(itc.new Th2(), "Sub-thread-");

      t1.start();
      t2.start();
      }

      private class Th1 implements Runnable {

      @Override
      public void run() {
      for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
      synchronized (InterThCom.class) { // lock up inner-loop

      // boss-thread gets the lock first
      // wait for sub-thread and let it run;
      // otherwise, skip this check
      if (isTh2RunFirst == false) {
      // wait for sub-thread, if boss-thread gets the lock first
      try {
      InterThCom.class.wait();
      } catch (InterruptedException e1) {
      e1.printStackTrace();
      }
      }

      // print iteration 100 times
      for (int j = 0; j < 100; j++) {
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
      }
      // done printing 100 times

      // sub-thread should run already at this point
      isTh2RunFirst = true;

      // This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

      // wake up sub-thread
      InterThCom.class.notify();

      // wait for sub-thread
      try {
      InterThCom.class.wait();
      } catch (InterruptedException e) {
      e.printStackTrace();
      }
      }
      }
      }
      }

      private class Th2 implements Runnable {

      @Override
      public void run() {
      for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
      synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
      // print iteration 10 times
      for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++) {
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
      }
      // done printing 10 times

      // sub-thread already prints j iteration
      isTh2RunFirst = true;

      // This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

      // wake up boss-thread
      InterThCom.class.notify();

      // wait for boss-thread
      try {
      InterThCom.class.wait();
      } catch (InterruptedException e) {
      e.printStackTrace();
      }
      }
      }
      synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
      // boss-thread is waiting at the last iteration, so wake it up
      InterThCom.class.notify();
      }
      }
      }

      }


      Things I would like help with:




      • Did I use "synchronized" block in an efficient way that aligns with conventional approach?



      • Are there other locking approach that will make my code less cluttered and cleaner?




        • My initial thought was using a separate class called PrintStmt to wrap all the statements inside the run and then called it in the run method then lock the invocation. That way, run only has the invocation and the lock.



      • Also, my wait and notify pairs are all over, is there a better way to "organize" them in a way that looks better? E.g. one of my notify call is outside of the double for-loop in the sub-thread Th2 class. This is an edge case but I am having trouble to integrate that inside the double-loops.


      • I am new to multi-threading. So, I am grateful for any other addresses and corrections to my implementation of the inter-communication for two threads with some extra requirement. Or other suggestions on implementing thread-communication will be appreciated.











      share|improve this question















      This is a follow-up answer "implementation" to a question I posted on SO. For the sake of convenience, I will repeat my intent: I want one thread (called sub-thread) to print 10 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations; then another (boss-thread) to print 100 times under outer-loop with 2 iterations provided that sub-thread goes first. It will look something like this:



      Sub Thread- iter = 1
      Sub Thread- iter = 2
      ...
      Sub Thread- iter = 10
      Boss Thread- iter = 1
      Boss Thread- iter = 2
      ...
      Boss Thread- iter = 100


      This sub-thread and boss-thread printing sequence will continue for 2 times (outer-loop).



      Here's my code:



      public class InterThCom {
      // flag default to false for checking if sub-thread
      // gets the lock first
      private boolean isTh2RunFirst = false;

      public static void main(String args) {
      InterThCom itc = new InterThCom();

      Thread t1 = new Thread(itc.new Th1(), "Boss-thread-");
      Thread t2 = new Thread(itc.new Th2(), "Sub-thread-");

      t1.start();
      t2.start();
      }

      private class Th1 implements Runnable {

      @Override
      public void run() {
      for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
      synchronized (InterThCom.class) { // lock up inner-loop

      // boss-thread gets the lock first
      // wait for sub-thread and let it run;
      // otherwise, skip this check
      if (isTh2RunFirst == false) {
      // wait for sub-thread, if boss-thread gets the lock first
      try {
      InterThCom.class.wait();
      } catch (InterruptedException e1) {
      e1.printStackTrace();
      }
      }

      // print iteration 100 times
      for (int j = 0; j < 100; j++) {
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
      }
      // done printing 100 times

      // sub-thread should run already at this point
      isTh2RunFirst = true;

      // This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

      // wake up sub-thread
      InterThCom.class.notify();

      // wait for sub-thread
      try {
      InterThCom.class.wait();
      } catch (InterruptedException e) {
      e.printStackTrace();
      }
      }
      }
      }
      }

      private class Th2 implements Runnable {

      @Override
      public void run() {
      for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
      synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
      // print iteration 10 times
      for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++) {
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " iter-" + (j + 1));
      }
      // done printing 10 times

      // sub-thread already prints j iteration
      isTh2RunFirst = true;

      // This print helps split boss-th and sub-th prints
      System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " outer-loop iter:" + (i + 1));

      // wake up boss-thread
      InterThCom.class.notify();

      // wait for boss-thread
      try {
      InterThCom.class.wait();
      } catch (InterruptedException e) {
      e.printStackTrace();
      }
      }
      }
      synchronized (InterThCom.class) {
      // boss-thread is waiting at the last iteration, so wake it up
      InterThCom.class.notify();
      }
      }
      }

      }


      Things I would like help with:




      • Did I use "synchronized" block in an efficient way that aligns with conventional approach?



      • Are there other locking approach that will make my code less cluttered and cleaner?




        • My initial thought was using a separate class called PrintStmt to wrap all the statements inside the run and then called it in the run method then lock the invocation. That way, run only has the invocation and the lock.



      • Also, my wait and notify pairs are all over, is there a better way to "organize" them in a way that looks better? E.g. one of my notify call is outside of the double for-loop in the sub-thread Th2 class. This is an edge case but I am having trouble to integrate that inside the double-loops.


      • I am new to multi-threading. So, I am grateful for any other addresses and corrections to my implementation of the inter-communication for two threads with some extra requirement. Or other suggestions on implementing thread-communication will be appreciated.








      java multithreading






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Nov 10 at 17:51

























      asked Nov 10 at 17:26









      Learner80239

      62




      62





      bumped to the homepage by Community 14 mins ago


      This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.







      bumped to the homepage by Community 14 mins ago


      This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          One completely different approach would be to use RxJava to abstract away any manual thread handling.
          RxJava offers the class Observable. For our purpose here you can think of it as a stream of data that begins to emit values once you call subscribe() on it.
          Observable#onNext gets called every time the next value gets emitted from the stream.
          This way we can create two Observables from a stream of integers (100 for boss, 10 for sub) and arrange them in the desired way:



          public static void main(String args) throws InterruptedException {
          Observable<Integer> bossObservable = Observable.range(1, 100) // emit integers from 1 to 100
          .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
          .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Boss " + i)); // gets executed for each
          // value in the stream
          Observable<Integer> subObservable = Observable.range(1, 10) // emit integers from 1 to 10
          .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
          .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Sub " + i)); // gets executed for each
          // value in the stream

          subObservable.concatWith(bossObservable) // append bossObservable to subObservable
          // -> bossObservable runs after subObservable has finished
          .repeat(2) // we repeat this two times, like the outer for loop in your solution
          .subscribe(); // this starts the execution

          while (true) {
          Thread.sleep(100); // keep main thread alive
          }
          }


          The example code uses RxJava 2.2.3.
          As you can probably tell, the code is quite concise but also hard to grasp if you're not familiar with Rx, because the framework takes care of the thread handling.



          If you want to learn more about reactive programming you can read the excellent introduction by Andre Staltz: https://gist.github.com/staltz/868e7e9bc2a7b8c1f754






          share|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
            StackExchange.snippets.init();
            });
            });
            }, "code-snippets");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "196"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f207370%2fenforce-printing-sequence-using-wait-and-notify%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            0
            down vote













            One completely different approach would be to use RxJava to abstract away any manual thread handling.
            RxJava offers the class Observable. For our purpose here you can think of it as a stream of data that begins to emit values once you call subscribe() on it.
            Observable#onNext gets called every time the next value gets emitted from the stream.
            This way we can create two Observables from a stream of integers (100 for boss, 10 for sub) and arrange them in the desired way:



            public static void main(String args) throws InterruptedException {
            Observable<Integer> bossObservable = Observable.range(1, 100) // emit integers from 1 to 100
            .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
            .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Boss " + i)); // gets executed for each
            // value in the stream
            Observable<Integer> subObservable = Observable.range(1, 10) // emit integers from 1 to 10
            .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
            .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Sub " + i)); // gets executed for each
            // value in the stream

            subObservable.concatWith(bossObservable) // append bossObservable to subObservable
            // -> bossObservable runs after subObservable has finished
            .repeat(2) // we repeat this two times, like the outer for loop in your solution
            .subscribe(); // this starts the execution

            while (true) {
            Thread.sleep(100); // keep main thread alive
            }
            }


            The example code uses RxJava 2.2.3.
            As you can probably tell, the code is quite concise but also hard to grasp if you're not familiar with Rx, because the framework takes care of the thread handling.



            If you want to learn more about reactive programming you can read the excellent introduction by Andre Staltz: https://gist.github.com/staltz/868e7e9bc2a7b8c1f754






            share|improve this answer

























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              One completely different approach would be to use RxJava to abstract away any manual thread handling.
              RxJava offers the class Observable. For our purpose here you can think of it as a stream of data that begins to emit values once you call subscribe() on it.
              Observable#onNext gets called every time the next value gets emitted from the stream.
              This way we can create two Observables from a stream of integers (100 for boss, 10 for sub) and arrange them in the desired way:



              public static void main(String args) throws InterruptedException {
              Observable<Integer> bossObservable = Observable.range(1, 100) // emit integers from 1 to 100
              .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
              .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Boss " + i)); // gets executed for each
              // value in the stream
              Observable<Integer> subObservable = Observable.range(1, 10) // emit integers from 1 to 10
              .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
              .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Sub " + i)); // gets executed for each
              // value in the stream

              subObservable.concatWith(bossObservable) // append bossObservable to subObservable
              // -> bossObservable runs after subObservable has finished
              .repeat(2) // we repeat this two times, like the outer for loop in your solution
              .subscribe(); // this starts the execution

              while (true) {
              Thread.sleep(100); // keep main thread alive
              }
              }


              The example code uses RxJava 2.2.3.
              As you can probably tell, the code is quite concise but also hard to grasp if you're not familiar with Rx, because the framework takes care of the thread handling.



              If you want to learn more about reactive programming you can read the excellent introduction by Andre Staltz: https://gist.github.com/staltz/868e7e9bc2a7b8c1f754






              share|improve this answer























                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                One completely different approach would be to use RxJava to abstract away any manual thread handling.
                RxJava offers the class Observable. For our purpose here you can think of it as a stream of data that begins to emit values once you call subscribe() on it.
                Observable#onNext gets called every time the next value gets emitted from the stream.
                This way we can create two Observables from a stream of integers (100 for boss, 10 for sub) and arrange them in the desired way:



                public static void main(String args) throws InterruptedException {
                Observable<Integer> bossObservable = Observable.range(1, 100) // emit integers from 1 to 100
                .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
                .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Boss " + i)); // gets executed for each
                // value in the stream
                Observable<Integer> subObservable = Observable.range(1, 10) // emit integers from 1 to 10
                .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
                .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Sub " + i)); // gets executed for each
                // value in the stream

                subObservable.concatWith(bossObservable) // append bossObservable to subObservable
                // -> bossObservable runs after subObservable has finished
                .repeat(2) // we repeat this two times, like the outer for loop in your solution
                .subscribe(); // this starts the execution

                while (true) {
                Thread.sleep(100); // keep main thread alive
                }
                }


                The example code uses RxJava 2.2.3.
                As you can probably tell, the code is quite concise but also hard to grasp if you're not familiar with Rx, because the framework takes care of the thread handling.



                If you want to learn more about reactive programming you can read the excellent introduction by Andre Staltz: https://gist.github.com/staltz/868e7e9bc2a7b8c1f754






                share|improve this answer












                One completely different approach would be to use RxJava to abstract away any manual thread handling.
                RxJava offers the class Observable. For our purpose here you can think of it as a stream of data that begins to emit values once you call subscribe() on it.
                Observable#onNext gets called every time the next value gets emitted from the stream.
                This way we can create two Observables from a stream of integers (100 for boss, 10 for sub) and arrange them in the desired way:



                public static void main(String args) throws InterruptedException {
                Observable<Integer> bossObservable = Observable.range(1, 100) // emit integers from 1 to 100
                .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
                .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Boss " + i)); // gets executed for each
                // value in the stream
                Observable<Integer> subObservable = Observable.range(1, 10) // emit integers from 1 to 10
                .subscribeOn(Schedulers.io()) // choose thread pool to run on
                .doOnNext(i -> System.out.println(Thread.currentThread() + " Sub " + i)); // gets executed for each
                // value in the stream

                subObservable.concatWith(bossObservable) // append bossObservable to subObservable
                // -> bossObservable runs after subObservable has finished
                .repeat(2) // we repeat this two times, like the outer for loop in your solution
                .subscribe(); // this starts the execution

                while (true) {
                Thread.sleep(100); // keep main thread alive
                }
                }


                The example code uses RxJava 2.2.3.
                As you can probably tell, the code is quite concise but also hard to grasp if you're not familiar with Rx, because the framework takes care of the thread handling.



                If you want to learn more about reactive programming you can read the excellent introduction by Andre Staltz: https://gist.github.com/staltz/868e7e9bc2a7b8c1f754







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Nov 11 at 3:01









                fap

                1615




                1615






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f207370%2fenforce-printing-sequence-using-wait-and-notify%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Create new schema in PostgreSQL using DBeaver

                    Deepest pit of an array with Javascript: test on Codility

                    Costa Masnaga