So yes, you're safe.
Static variables are not thread safe. Instance variables do not require thread synchronization unless shared among threads. But, static variables are always shared by all the threads in the process.
I've been using this pattern to initialize static data in my classes. It looks thread safe to me, but I know how subtle threading problems can be. Here's the code:
public class MyClass // bad code, do not use
{
static string _myResource = "";
static volatile bool _init = false;
public MyClass()
{
if (_init == true) return;
lock (_myResource)
{
if (_init == true) return;
Thread.Sleep(3000); // some operation that takes a long time
_myResource = "Hello World";
_init = true;
}
}
public string MyResource { get { return _myResource; } }
}
Are there any holes here? Maybe there is a simpler way to do this.
UPDATE: Consensus seems to be that a static constructor is the way to go. I came up with the following version using a static constructor.
public class MyClass
{
static MyClass() // a static constructor
{
Thread.Sleep(3000); // some operation that takes a long time
_myResource = "Hello World";
}
static string _myResource = null;
public MyClass() { LocalString = "Act locally"; } // an instance constructor
// use but don't modify
public bool MyResourceReady { get { return _myResource != null; } }
public string LocalString { get; set; }
}
I hope this is better.
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