[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Duplicate object prevention policy
From: |
Jan Röhrich |
Subject: |
Re: Duplicate object prevention policy |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Nov 2005 23:16:31 +0100 |
> The theoretical answer depends on lots of things, such as:
>
> 1) the probable number of times that the method will be called,
> 2) the likelihood that the lookup (if implemented) will succeed,
> 3) the cost of creating the object,
> 4) the cost of the name lookup is,
> 5) the incremental GC cost if duplicate copies of the object become
> garbage,
> 6) the incremental GC cost if the mapping data structure keeps
> otherwise garbage objects alive,
> 7) the incremental GC cost if the application keeps duplicate
> copies of the objects alive,
> 8) the (speculative) cost of using obj.equals(obj2) versus obj == obj2
> if we could guarantee that objects are ONLY created via the method,
> 9) etcetera
>
>
> And all of these depend on the nature of the objects and the way that they
> are used in a typical application. In short, there are no general answers.
Hi Steve,
I know that this depends on a lot of things but I just wanted to know if
this has been discussed before and if there is any "guide" for the most
likely cases.
I prefer a style of very clean "semantics" which means that I will
implement the lookup in most cases, even if there my be some performance
issues - if they're not too big.
----
Jan
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil