synchronized again

[Bob Moranski]

Hi, I was wondering if there is a difference between
synchronized void doThis(){
//code
}
and
void doThis(){
synchronize(this){
//code
}
}

[Todd Bush]

In the first sample, the whole method is synchronized. In the second, only the code between
synchronized(this) {
//code
}
would be synchronized.

[Jerry Pulley]

Bob,
The two code samples you presented have exactly the same effect.
jply

[Bob Moranski]

Thank you so very much!

[Suneel Setlur]

The two scenarios do not generate the same op-codes.
The synchronized method generates the monitor-enter and monitor- exit op-code, while the synchronized block does'nt generate these two op-codes. Also it is said that the method synchronization is faster than the block synchronization.
------------------
Suneel

[Jerry Pulley]

Suneel,
The exact bytecodes may differ, but how many of us are actually concerned with the code at that level? The same behavior can be accomplished with different bytecode arrangements.
Anyway, look at JLS2 8.4.3.6 and 14.18. Sun guarantees that both of the code samples Bob presented will have the same effect.
Regarding performance, there is a small penalty associated with the <code>synchronized</code> statement vice a <code>synchronized</code> method in some circumstances in some VM's. But this penalty is tiny compared to the performance benefit you can gain by making the critical section as small as possible, because that reduces the chance that two threads will contend for the lock, and contention is where you really take a performance hit.
So when I really need to sync the entire method body, and the appropriate monitor is the method's object, I use a sync'ed method. Most of the time, however, a sync'ed statement is more appropriate and performs better.
Jerry