Yes, exactly. ParaNamer doesn't guarantee that `Paranamer` implementations can safely be accessed from seveal threads at the same time; As this kind of access may happen within a parameter name provider, I'm synchronizing the access to be on the same side. Whether actual `Paranamer` implementations would have a problem or not is of course another question, but I think it's good to be on the safe side.

If you feel like the comment should be improved let me know of feel free to do it yourself.