commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classscan] Metadata API discussion
Date Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:09:33 GMT
On 7 June 2012 21:11, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:56 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Not sure I follow this. Why would an interface use extra memory?
>> I can see that it might add a bit more to the static size of a class,
>> but why would it add more to each instance of a class that uses it?
>>
>
> It's not the interface itself.  It's the fact that you have to have
> more objects loaded into memory when you use the interface-based
> approach.  For example, if BCEL has some object that represents a
> class' metadata, then we'll have to put some "adapter" object in front
> of it that implements our metadata API interface and knows how to
> speak BCEL-speak to extract the information.

Yes, but again, surely there won't be all that many such objects?

I think some tests should be done of the two approaches before
deciding to abandon the interface-based design.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message