https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
Remy Maucherat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
Boris Folgmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #7 from John Engebretson ---
> I just want to make sure to manage expectations of what any change will
> actually accomplish.
Understood, agreed, and appreciated. :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #6 from Christopher Schultz ---
I'm fairly sure that try/catch/finally don't add any overhead in terms of
method-code-bytes. It expands the size of the exception-handling table, but it
doesn't reduce code size. Perhaps overall .clas
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #5 from Mark Thomas ---
Looking at the generated source and the code the generates it, I don't see why
we need the try/catch/finally.
Local testing indicates we can remove the try/catch/finally. We can also remove
the 3-arg release
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #4 from John Engebretson ---
My tests show a reduction in .class file size and a small reduction in the
JVM's code cache, but that may be a margin-of-error situation. This is
definitely not a high-impact change.
I'm okay to close
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #3 from Christopher Schultz ---
Do your tests show that suppressing these calls when the parameter will be
*true* that it still gives a benefit?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #2 from John Engebretson ---
Yes, sorry for the error. :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69333
--- Comment #1 from Christopher Schultz ---
(In reply to John Engebretson from comment #0)
> public static void releaseTag(Tag tag, InstanceManager instanceManager,
> boolean reused) {
> // Caller ensures pool is non-null if reuse is true
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
