Menu
When return value is not of interest, is there any (even irrelevant in practice) difference between AtomicInteger.getAndIncrement() and AtomicInteger.incrementAndGet() methods, when return value is ignored?
I'm thinking of differences like which would be more idiomatic, as well as which would put less load in CPU caches getting synchronized, or anything else really, anything to help decide which one to use more rationally than tossing a coin.
715
Integers are object representations of literals and are therefore immutable, you can basically only read them. AtomicIntegers are containers for those values. You can read and set them. Same as asigning a value to variable.
AtomicInteger class provides operations on underlying int value that can be read and written atomically, and also contains advanced atomic operations. AtomicInteger supports atomic operations on underlying int variable. It have get and set methods that work like reads and writes on volatile variables.
AtomicInteger uses combination of volatile & CAS (compare and swap) to achieve thread-safety for Integer Counter. It is non-blocking in nature and thus highly usable in writing high throughput concurrent data structures that can be used under low to moderate thread contention.
AtomicInteger is slower than synchronized.
Since no answer to the actual question has been given, here's my personal opinion based on the other answers (thanks, upvoted) and Java convention:
incrementAndGet() is better, because method names should start with the verb describing the action, and intended action here is to increment only.
Starting with verb is the common Java convention, also described by official docs:
"Methods should be verbs, in mixed case with the first letter lowercase, with the first letter of each internal word capitalized."
50
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With