Java: calling super.clone() method, volatile int value not copied in cloned object
Question
I faced one production bug (it happened only once at least in last 1 year). After investigation I can conclude that super.clone() method was unable to copy an "volatile int" value to the new cloned object .
Does anyone faced this problem ever?
clone() method is widely used in jdk libraries and this is a basic thing that clone method guarantees. Can this happen?
1 answers
solution1
1 2015-07-04 10:38:23
It's not safe to clone volatile data. Please see this post for side effects of cloning.
The technical post webpages of this site follow the CC BY-SA 4.0 protocol. If you need to reprint, please indicate the site URL or the original address.Any question please contact:yoyou2525@163.com.
Related Question
Java : clone() operation calling super.clone()
Downcasting while calling super.clone() method
Java: super.clone() method and inheritance
In Java, how super.clone() method “knows” which object has called it?
Overriding Clone without calling the super.clone
Is super.clone() of Cloneable a thread safe method?
Difference between initiliazing an object and super.clone()
java: super.clone() with Jackon ObjectMapper
Java clone() method using new keyword and a copy constructor instead of super.clone()
super.clone() Queries?
Related Tags