@@ -1529,6 +1529,30 @@ If a usage of `ThreadLocal` doesn't fall into either of these categories, it can
15291529There is an inspection "ThreadLocal field not declared static final" in IntelliJ IDEA which
15301530corresponds to this item.
15311531
1532+ Static ` ThreadLocal ` fields could also be enforced using Checkstyle, using the following combination
1533+ of checks:
1534+ ``` xml
1535+ <!-- Enforce 'private static final' order of modifiers -->
1536+ <module name =" ModifierOrder"
1537+ 1538+ <!-- Ensure all ThreadLocal fields are private -->
1539+ <!-- Requires https://github.com/sevntu-checkstyle/sevntu.checkstyle -->
1540+ <module name =" AvoidModifiersForTypesCheck"
1541+ <property name =" forbiddenClassesRegexpProtected" value =" ThreadLocal"
1542+ <property name =" forbiddenClassesRegexpPublic" value =" ThreadLocal"
1543+ <property name =" forbiddenClassesRegexpPackagePrivate" value =" ThreadLocal"
1544+ </module >
1545+ 1546+ <!-- Prohibit any ThreadLocal field which is not private static final -->
1547+ <module name =" Regexp"
1548+ <property name =" id" value =" nonStaticThreadLocal"
1549+ <property name =" format"
1550+ value =" ^\s*private\s+(ThreadLocal|static\s+ThreadLocal|final\s+ThreadLocal)"
1551+ <property name =" illegalPattern" value =" true"
1552+ <property name =" message" value =" Non-static final ThreadLocal"
1553+ </module >
1554+ ```
1555+ 15321556<a name =" threadlocal-design " ></a >
15331557[ #] ( #threadlocal-design ) TL.2. Doesn't a ** ` ThreadLocal ` mask issues with the code, such as poor
15341558control flow or data flow design?** Is it possible to redesign the system without using
0 commit comments