james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Norman Maurer ...@byteaction.de>
Subject RE: svn commit: r413135 -/james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/transport/matchers/AbstractNetworkMatcher.java
Date Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:16:43 GMT
Am Freitag, den 09.06.2006, 22:05 +0100 schrieb Steve Brewin:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> >
> >
> > Norman Maurer wrote:
> >
> > > > > - Add [protected] set methods for ServiceManager and DNSServer
> > > > Those properties were private, and you've now exposed setters
> > > i make a mistake
> >
> > :-)  No problem.  So this was just a style change, not a
> > planned change in
> > function?  You prefer to use a private setter rather than an
> > assignment, and
> > hope that the call overhead gets optimized out by the
> > compiler?  Not that it
> > matters much in an init() method.  :-)
> 
> Most compilers don't optimize this out, but the JVMs do.
> 
> To prove the first, decompile your bytecode and see if the methods which
> invoke the setter method still do.
> 
> To prove the latter, read the many papers on JVM optimizations, or more
> pragmattically test it by measuring the releveant performance of each
> approach over several iterations.
> 
> Optimizing out trivial assertions is one of the most basic tuneups a modern
> JVM does. Its true that this may not happen on the first reference and the
> optimization will inevitably consume processor time. But its a neglible cost
> for good style.
> 
> -- Steve

For me its just a "style change". Anyway if someone not like it i revert
it. But for me its "cleaner".

Bye
Norman


Mime
View raw message