Core Java

Does Immutability really means Thread Safety?

I have often read articles telling “If an object is immutable, it is thread safe”. Actually, I have never found an article that convinces me that immutable means thread safety. Even the book by Brian Goetz Java Concurrency in Practice with its chapter on immutability did not fully satisfied me. In this book we can read word for word, in a frame : Immutable objects are always thread-safe. I think this sentence deserve more explanations.

So I am going to try to define immutability and its relation to thread safety.

Definitions Immutability

My definition is “An immutable object is an object which state does not change after its construction”. I am deliberately vague, since no one really agrees on the exact definitions.

Thread safety

You can find a lot of different definition of “thread safe” on internet. It’s actually very tricky to define it. I would say that a thread safe code is a code which has an expected behaviour in multi-thread environment. I let you define “expected behaviour”…

The String example

Lets have a look at the code of String (actually just a part of the code…):

public class String {
    private final char value[];

    /** Cache the hash code for the string */
    private int hash; // Default to 0

    public String(char[] value) {
        this.value = Arrays.copyOf(value, value.length);
    }

    public int hashCode() {
        int h = hash;
        if (h == 0 && value.length > 0) {
            char val[] = value;

            for (int i = 0; i < value.length; i++) {
                h = 31 * h + val[i];
            }
            hash = h;
        }
        return h;
    }
}

String is considered as immutable. Looking at its implementation, we can deduct one thing : an immutable can change its internal state (in this case, the hashcode which is lazy loaded) as long as it is not externally visible.

Now I am going to rewrite the hashcode method in a non thread safe way :

    public int hashCode() {
        if (hash == 0 && value.length > 0) {
            char val[] = value;

            for (int i = 0; i < value.length; i++) {
                hash = 31 * hash + val[i];
            }
        }
        return hash;
    }

As you can see, I have removed the local variable h and affected the variable hash directly instead. This implementation is NOT thread safe! If several threads call hashcode at the same time, the returned value could be different for each thread. The question is, does this class is immutable? Since two different threads can see a different hashcode, in an external point of view we have a change of state and so it is not immutable.

We can so conclude that String is immutable because it is thread safe and not the opposite. So… What’s the point of saying “Do some immutable object, it is thread-safe! But take care, you have to make your immutable object thread-safe!”?

The ImmutableSimpleDateFormat example

Below, I have written a class similar to SimpleDateFormat.

public class VerySimpleDateFormat {

    private final DateFormat formatter = SimpleDateFormat.getDateInstance(SimpleDateFormat.SHORT);

    public String format(Date d){
        return formatter.format(d);
    }
}

This code is not thread safe because SimpleDateFormat.format is not.

Is this object immutable? Good question! We have done our best to make all fields not modifiable, we don’t use any setter or any methods that let suggest that the state of the object will change. Actually, internally SimpleDateFormat change its state and that’s what makes it not thread safe. Since something change in the object graph, I would say that it’s not immutable, even if it looks like it… The problem is not even that SimpleDateFormat changes its internal state, the problem is that it does it in a non-thread safe way.

Conclusion of this example, it is not that easy to make an immutable class. The final keyword is not enough, you have to make sure that the object fields of your object doesn’t change their state, which is sometimes impossible.

Immutable objects can have non thread-safe methods (No magics!)

Let’s have a look at the following code.

public class HelloAppender {

    private final String greeting;

    public HelloAppender(String name) {
        this.greeting = 'hello ' + name + '!\n';
    }

    public void appendTo(Appendable app) throws IOException {
        app.append(greeting);
    }
}

The class HelloAppender is definitely immutable. The method appendTo accepts an Appendable. Since an Appendable has no guarantee to be thread-safe (eg. StringBuilder), appending to this Appendable will cause problems in a multi-thread environment.

Conclusion

Making immutable objects are definitely a good practice in some cases and it helps a lot to make thread-safe code. But it bothers me when I read everywhere Immutable objects are thread safe, displayed as an axiom. I get the point but I think it is always good to think a bit about that in order to understand what causes non-thread safe codes.

Thanks to the comment of Jose, I end up this article with a different conclusion. It’s all about the definition of immutable. It needs clarifications!

An object is immutable if :

  • All its field are initialized before being used (which means you can do lazy initialization)
  • The states of the field does not change after their initialization (does not change means that the object graph doesn’t change, even the internal state of the children)

An immutable object will always be thread-safe unless it deals it has to manipulate non thread safe objects.

Reference: Do Immutability really means Thread Safety? from our JCG partner Tibo Delor at the InvalidCodeException blog.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Wilton Lazary
Wilton Lazary
10 years ago
Back to top button