Adrian Cole
Adrian Cole
I haven't had time to create tests for this as there is some more urgent work I have to complete. If someone else can, it is appreciated.
I think @reta is looking to remove synchronized for a different concurrent pattern, so whatever is missing here probably a good time to fix it without resurrecting synchronized ;)
so currently it should be guarded by this in RealSpan ```java @Override public Span tag(String key, String value) { synchronized (state) { state.tag(key, value); } return this; } ``` ScopedSpan...
might have been a red herring.. for example, a user cannot access the mutable span until it is inside a span handler, which should already be locked at that point....
this is out-of-date and over 2.5 years old. This doesn't mean it isn't valid, but please re-open if necessary today.
closing as out-of-date and seems possible addressed upstream. If not the case, please re-open
fixed by #1371 or open a new issue. thanks!
according to #1336, this test passes before or after this change. I'll merge the latter, as the test needs to be improved in order to show what's wrong. When ready...
this is out-of-date and 3.5 years old. This doesn't mean it isn't valid, but please re-open if necessary today.