Lets say I have 3 threads which implement a Runnable interface, and I've started them using below statements.
t1.start();
t2.start();
t3.start();
Is there any way using join(), wait(), notify() combination to make threads end in this order t3 , t2, t1 ?
Nope, the threads will terminate depending on what happens inside of their run() method implementations. If you're simply given a currently-running thread without any access to the code it's executing, there is no way to force it to terminate (aside from calling stop() or destroy(), which are both deprecated and should not be used).
If you can write the code that these threads are running, however, it'd be really simple:
Thread t3 = new Thread(() -> {
System.out.println("Thread 3 terminating...");
});
Thread t2 = new Thread(() -> {
try { t3.join(); } catch(InterruptedException e) {};
System.out.println("Thread 2 terminating...");
});
Thread t1 = new Thread(() -> {
try { t2.join(); } catch(InterruptedException e) {};
System.out.println("Thread 1 terminating...");
});
t1.start();
t2.start();
t3.start();
Sounds like you might want a producer consumer model.
BlockingQueue<Callable<Boolean>> queue1 = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>();
Thread t1 = new Thread(()->{
//do work.
queue1.add(()-> someTask() );
//do more work.
queue1.add(()-> someTaskThatReturnsFalse() );
}).start();
Thread t2 = new Thread(()->{
boolean shouldBeRunning = true;
while(shouldBeRunning){
Callable<Boolean> r = queue1.poll();
shouldBeRunning = r.call();
}
}).start();
You can have as many queues as you like. There are other ways too using locks and barriers. This could be done using join/wait/notify but you would essentially be re-creating the LinkedBlockingQueue.
runmethods terminate. What exactly are you trying to achieve?