我想根据所积累的意见补充几点看法。

Thread.stop() will stop a thread if the security manager allows it. Thread.stop() is dangerous. Having said that, if you are working in a JEE environment and you have no control over the code being called, it may be necessary; see Why is Thread.stop deprecated? You should never stop stop a container worker thread. If you want to run code that tends to hang, (carefully) start a new daemon thread and monitor it, killing if necessary. stop() creates a new ThreadDeathError error on the calling thread and then throws that error on the target thread. Therefore, the stack trace is generally worthless. In JRE 6, stop() checks with the security manager and then calls stop1() that calls stop0(). stop0() is native code. As of Java 13 Thread.stop() has not been removed (yet), but Thread.stop(Throwable) was removed in Java 11. (mailing list, JDK-8204243)

在Java中，线程不会被杀死，但是线程的停止是通过协作的方式完成的。线程被要求终止，然后线程可以优雅地关闭。

通常使用一个易失性布尔字段，线程定期检查，并在设置为相应值时终止。

我不会使用布尔值来检查线程是否应该终止。如果你使用volatile作为字段修饰符，这将可靠地工作，但如果你的代码变得更复杂，而不是在while循环中使用其他阻塞方法，它可能会发生，你的代码根本不会终止，或者至少需要更长的时间。

某些块库方法支持中断。

每个线程已经有一个布尔标志中断状态，你应该利用它。它可以这样实现:

public void run() {
   try {
      while (!interrupted()) {
         // ...
      }
   } catch (InterruptedException consumed)
      /* Allow thread to exit */
   }
}

public void cancel() { interrupt(); }

源代码改编自Java并发实践。因为cancel()方法是公共的，你可以让另一个线程按你的意愿调用这个方法。

没有办法优雅地终止线程。

您可以尝试中断线程，一个常用的策略是使用毒丸来通知线程停止自己

public class CancelSupport {
    public static class CommandExecutor implements Runnable {
            private BlockingQueue<String> queue;
            public static final String POISON_PILL  = “stopnow”;
            public CommandExecutor(BlockingQueue<String> queue) {
                    this.queue=queue;
            }
            @Override
            public void run() {
                    boolean stop=false;
                    while(!stop) {
                            try {
                                    String command=queue.take();
                                    if(POISON_PILL.equals(command)) {
                                            stop=true;
                                    } else {
                                            // do command
                                            System.out.println(command);
                                    }
                            } catch (InterruptedException e) {
                                    stop=true;
                            }
                    }
                    System.out.println(“Stopping execution”);
            }

    }

}

BlockingQueue<String> queue=new LinkedBlockingQueue<String>();
Thread t=new Thread(new CommandExecutor(queue));
queue.put(“hello”);
queue.put(“world”);
t.start();
Thread.sleep(1000);
queue.put(“stopnow”);

http://anandsekar.github.io/cancel-support-for-threads/

一般来说你不会…

你可以使用Thread.interrupt() (javadoc link)命令它中断正在做的事情。

在javadoc中有一个很好的解释(java technote链接)

线程。停止是不赞成的，所以我们如何停止一个线程在Java ?

总是使用中断方法和未来请求取消

当任务响应中断信号时，例如阻塞队列采取方法。

Callable < String > callable = new Callable < String > () {
    @Override
    public String call() throws Exception {
        String result = "";
        try {
            //assume below take method is blocked as no work is produced.
            result = queue.take();
        } catch (InterruptedException e) {
            Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
        }
        return result;
    }
};
Future future = executor.submit(callable);
try {
    String result = future.get(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
} catch (TimeoutException e) {
    logger.error("Thread timedout!");
    return "";
} finally {
    //this will call interrupt on queue which will abort the operation.
    //if it completes before time out, it has no side effects
    future.cancel(true);
}

当任务不响应中断信号时。假设任务执行套接字I/O，不响应中断信号，因此使用上述方法将不会中止任务，future将超时，但取消finally块将没有影响，线程将继续侦听套接字。如果由pool实现，我们可以关闭套接字或在连接时调用close方法。

public interface CustomCallable < T > extends Callable < T > {
    void cancel();
    RunnableFuture < T > newTask();
}

public class CustomExecutorPool extends ThreadPoolExecutor {
    protected < T > RunnableFuture < T > newTaskFor(Callable < T > callable) {
        if (callable instanceof CancellableTask)
            return ((CancellableTask < T > ) callable).newTask();
        else
            return super.newTaskFor(callable);
    }
}

public abstract class UnblockingIOTask < T > implements CustomCallable < T > {
    public synchronized void cancel() {
        try {
            obj.close();
        } catch (IOException e) {
            logger.error("io exception", e);
        }
    }

    public RunnableFuture < T > newTask() {
        return new FutureTask < T > (this) {
            public boolean cancel(boolean mayInterruptIfRunning) {
                try {
                    this.cancel();
                } finally {
                    return super.cancel(mayInterruptIfRunning);
                }
            }

        };
    }
}

我想根据所积累的意见补充几点看法。

Thread.stop() will stop a thread if the security manager allows it. Thread.stop() is dangerous. Having said that, if you are working in a JEE environment and you have no control over the code being called, it may be necessary; see Why is Thread.stop deprecated? You should never stop stop a container worker thread. If you want to run code that tends to hang, (carefully) start a new daemon thread and monitor it, killing if necessary. stop() creates a new ThreadDeathError error on the calling thread and then throws that error on the target thread. Therefore, the stack trace is generally worthless. In JRE 6, stop() checks with the security manager and then calls stop1() that calls stop0(). stop0() is native code. As of Java 13 Thread.stop() has not been removed (yet), but Thread.stop(Throwable) was removed in Java 11. (mailing list, JDK-8204243)