mr at sun.com
Wed Nov 11 11:26:40 PST 2009
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:09:13 -0800
> From: jonathan.gibbons at sun.com
> Is Library.listClasses likely to be a light-weight or an expensive operation?
Right now it's fairly expensive. It doesn't do even the simplest kinds
of caching; I could fix that easily if needed sooner rather than later.
In the long run it'll be pretty fast, even on the first invocation, once
we optimize the on-disk installed-module format.
> javac needs to list the classes on a package-by-package basis, so if
> listClasses is cheap (or if repeated calls are cheap), then I can run
> listClasses every time and filter the output. But if the method is expensive,
> then I will likely have to cache the results.
Even in the long run I suspect that a listClasses(String packageName)
method will be cheaper than the listClasses() method.
I suggest that for now you don't cache this information in the compiler.
If performance proves to be an early issue then I'll address it in the
More information about the jigsaw-dev