Mention Thread.Builder in ThreadFactoryBuilders javadocs

[bjmi]

API(s)

com.google.common.util.concurrent.ThreadFactoryBuilder

How do you want it to be improved?

Just as you can assign the the starting value of the counter for a Thread Builder / ThreadFactory (java.lang.Thread.Builder.name(String prefix, long start)),
you should also be able to assign the start value for Guava's com.google.common.util.concurrent.ThreadFactoryBuilder.

How about adding the following overload ThreadFactoryBuilder.setNameFormat(String nameFormat, long start)?

Checklist

• I agree to follow the code of conduct.

• I have read and understood the contribution guidelines.

• I have read and understood Guava's philosophy, and I strongly believe that this proposal aligns with it.

[xc-x]

Hi I would like to complete this issue. Can you plz assign it to me?

[u7683345]

I am new to open source and think I know how to solve this. Can I get assigned? Thanks!
-Andrew
@bjmi

[MsSteph74]

?

…

On Thu, Oct 10, 2024, 5:29 PM Andrew Gardner ***@***.***> wrote: I am new to open source and think I know how to solve this. Can I get assigned? Thanks! -Andrew @bjmi <https://github.com/bjmi> — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#7427 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A53DECKR4H2LGMJT4CZLOVLZ24EV3AVCNFSM6AAAAABPVZNP6SVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIMBWGIZDANZVGI> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[kluever]

Is there any reason you can't use the Thread.Builder API in Java 21? I think that mostly obsoletes our ThreadFactoryBuilder API.

[netdpb]

Hi @xc-x and @u7683345. Thanks for your interest in helping here. We're still not sure whether we want to add this feature at all. If we do decide to add it, we might be able to use your help.

[bjmi]

Is there any reason you can't use the Thread.Builder API in Java 21? I think that mostly obsoletes our ThreadFactoryBuilder API.

That's right. Then this request will benefit those who do not yet have Java 21 in use.

[kluever]

In general, we don't add features just for parity with JDK releases. If you have a compelling use case, we can discuss it, but the fact that it's been 14 years since this was created, and nobody has asked for it, makes me hesitant. The ID number is fairly arbitrary, and just meant to be a unique name to identify the thread. Why do you care if the numbering starts at 0 or 999 or whatever?

[bjmi]

We mainly use setDaemon and setNameFormat of the ThreadFactoryBuilder and both are supported by JDK Thread.Builder.
We will follow the suggestion and switch to the JDK variant and makes this issue obsolete.
Then, a reference to the JDK counterpart in the Javadoc would be helpful.

[kluever]

Closing for now...happy to re-evaluate if someone has a strong use case for caring about the # that the thread name starts at.