vitalyd at gmail.com
Thu Jan 24 14:40:31 UTC 2013
I know this was brought up on your c-i mailing list thread, but it really
feels like a new boolean field in j.l.Class is the cleaner solution (and
infinitely scalable and doesn't require bookkeeping in the Proxy class).
Is there really no existing alignment gap in j.l.Class layout that a
boolean can slide into?
Sent from my phone
On Jan 24, 2013 9:35 AM, "Peter Levart" <peter.levart at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/24/2013 03:10 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> On 24/01/2013 13:49, Peter Levart wrote:
>>> Should I file a RFE first?
>> Sorry I don't have time at the moment to study the proposed patch but
>> just to mention that it has come up a few times, its just that it never
>> bubbled up to the top of anyone's list. Here's the bug tracking it:
> I belive that is another bottleneck. It is mentioning the
> Proxy.getProxyClass method which also uses synchronization for maintaining
> a cache of proxy classes by request parameters. I could as well try to fix
> this too in the same patch if there is interest.
> Regards, Peter
More information about the core-libs-dev