Return to Answer

1. You're duplicating topics....

2. As was mentioned by AlexIv in his answer, there's a trait you can mix in if you want thread safety. There's another way though:

    val synchronizedMap = new scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String, Any]() with scala.collection.mutable.SynchronizedMap[String, Any]
   

That should give you the map with synchronization on each access. Easy, but might not meet the performance requirements. If so, it would be probably easier to create a custom class extending the LinkedHashMap, mixing in the concurrent.Map trait (as was suggested) and provide the implementation of relevant methods, i.e: putIfAbsent, remove replace (2 overloads).

As was mentioned by AlexIv in his answer, there's a trait you can mix in if you want thread safety. There's another way though:

    val synchronizedMap = new scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String, Any]() with scala.collection.mutable.SynchronizedMap[String, Any]

That should give you the map with synchronization on each access. Easy, but might not meet the performance requirements. If so, it would be probably easier to create a custom class extending the LinkedHashMap, mixing in the concurrent.Map trait (as was suggested) and provide the implementation of relevant methods, i.e: putIfAbsent, remove replace (2 overloads).

1. You're duplicating topics....

2. As was mentioned by AlexIv in his answer, there's a trait you can mix in if you want thread safety. There's another way though:

    val synchronizedMap = new scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String, Any]() with scala.collection.mutable.SynchronizedMap[String, Any]
   

That should give you the map with synchronization on each access. Easy, but might not meet the performance requirements. If so, it would be probably easier to create a custom class extending the LinkedHashMap, mixing in the concurrent.Map trait (as was suggested) and provide the implementation of relevant methods, i.e: putIfAbsent, remove replace (2 overloads).

1. You're duplicating topics....

2. As was mentioned by AlexIv in his answer, there's a trait you can mix in if you want thread safety. There's another way though:

    val synchronizedMap = new scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String, Any]() with scala.collection.mutable.SynchronizedMap[String, Any]
   

That should give you the map with synchronization on each access. Easy, but might not meet the performance requirements. If so, it would be probably easier to create a custom class extending the LinkedHashMap, mixing in the concurrent.Map trait (as was suggested) and provide the implementation of relevant methods, i.e: putIfAbsent, remove replace (2 overloads).

1. You're duplicating topics....

2. As was mentioned by AlexIv in his answer, there's a trait you can mix in if you want thread safety. There's another way though:

    val synchronizedMap = new scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String, Any]() with scala.collection.mutable.SynchronizedMap[String, Any]
   

That should give you the map with synchronization on each access. Easy, but might not meet the performance requirements. If so, it woul be probably the easiest to create a custom class extending the LinkedHashMap, mixing in the concurrent.Map trait (as was suggested) and provide the implementation of relevant methods, i.e: putIfAbsent, remove replace (2 overloads).

1. You're duplicating topics....

2. As was mentioned by AlexIv in his answer, there's a trait you can mix in if you want thread safety. There's another way though:

    val synchronizedMap = new scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String, Any]() with scala.collection.mutable.SynchronizedMap[String, Any]
   

That should give you the map with synchronization on each access. Easy, but might not meet the performance requirements. If so, it would be probably easier to create a custom class extending the LinkedHashMap, mixing in the concurrent.Map trait (as was suggested) and provide the implementation of relevant methods, i.e: putIfAbsent, remove replace (2 overloads).