http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?title=Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/ThreadDeath_problem/reply_(21)&feed=atom&action=historyThread:Talk:RoboRumble/ThreadDeath problem/reply (21) - Revision history2024-03-28T18:03:05ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.34.1http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?title=Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/ThreadDeath_problem/reply_(21)&diff=51300&oldid=prevSkilgannon: Reply to ThreadDeath problem2017-09-05T20:37:03Z<p>Reply to <a href="/wiki/Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/ThreadDeath_problem/reply_(20)" title="Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/ThreadDeath problem/reply (20)">ThreadDeath problem</a></p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>I think you're on the right track, it definitely feels like race conditions to me. However in this case you're wrong - both code blocks (println and readOutText) are synchronized with the same object, so they can't run at the same time. It isn't important which one they are synchronized with, it could even be a different object. See the [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4604003/synchronized-block-lock-more-than-one-object sharedLock example here].<br />
<br />
I think a good place to start looking is in the 'fixes' to the skipped turn behavior, which were documented [https://sourceforge.net/p/robocode/bugs/335/ here], as well as a [http://robowiki.net/wiki/User_talk:Wompi#Skipped_Turns_..._what_to_know_about.3F_956 very busy discussion on the wiki].</div>Skilgannon