Comments on: Is ThreadStatic a leaky abstraction?

By: The Morning Brew - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #998

The Morning Brew - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #998 — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 09:37:01 +0000

[...] Is ThreadStatic a leaky abstraction? – Jimmy Bogard the use of ThreadStatic to control object lifecycle, suggesting that its use may result in a leaky abstraction, and suggesting alternatives for controlling lifecycle. [...]

By: Mogens Heller Grabe

Mogens Heller Grabe — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 06:57:00 +0000

I’d agree if we were talking about code that a) we had a lot of, or b) we needed to touch it again and again because stuff would change – like e.g. the requirements for the lifecycle or something like that.

Ayende’s RavenDB message module, however, is just a tiny piece of infrastructure glue code that should be written once and then forgotten about, which is why the tight coupling to the hosting environment does not matter that much.

By: Corey Kaylor

Corey Kaylor — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:18:00 +0000

You will like the changes coming in RSB v3 then.

By: Chris Patterson

Chris Patterson — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:02:00 +0000

Great post Jimmy, you make a lot of really great points in it.

I agree that using a ThreadStatic in this way feels leaky. The are certainly reasons to use ThreadStatic values (particularly in transaction sensitive code) but if they are used they should be abstracted by the framework in question.