Hi Claes, What is the performance difference if this method calls getSimpleBinaryName? Your patch exposes the implementation details and sensitive to the change there, if any.
Mandy > On Dec 1, 2016, at 5:38 AM, Claes Redestad <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > due to recent interest to optimize Class.isAnonymousClass[1] I took > a look at the implementation and found that we can further improve > performance of this method, especially when asking non-anonymous > classes[2]. > > As such calls are a common occurrence during startup and bootstrap > of lambdas this actually appears rather worthwhile: > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8170595/webrev.01/ > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170595 > > Thanks! > > /Claes > > [1] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-December/045116.html > [2] > Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units > Clazz.isAnonymousClass_Anon avgt 50 200.900 ± 15.503 ns/op > Clazz.isAnonymousClass_Regular avgt 50 136.896 ± 9.605 ns/op > > Clazz.isAnonymousClass_Anon avgt 50 186.564 ± 12.219 ns/op > Clazz.isAnonymousClass_Regular avgt 50 33.878 ± 1.524 ns/op > > See bug for benchmark source
