[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6885?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15256351#comment-15256351
]
Bryan Pendleton commented on DERBY-6885:
----------------------------------------
Thanks for the follow-up; good to know I'm starting to get the hang of these
generic types!
I'm quite happy with the version of the code you presented in your patch; I
don't
see any need to shorten it further.
> Remove ReuseFactory
> -------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-6885
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6885
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Services
> Affects Versions: 10.13.0.0
> Reporter: Knut Anders Hatlen
> Assignee: Knut Anders Hatlen
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: d6885.diff
>
>
> ReuseFactory used to help reduce object allocations when converting
> numbers/booleans from primitive types to object types. After DERBY-2383 and
> DERBY-6230, the ReuseFactory methods are just wrappers around standard
> library methods such as Integer.valueOf() and Long.valueOf().
> Callers could just as easily call the corresponding valueOf() method
> directly, or rely on auto-boxing. Both ways use the same cache as
> ReuseFactory currently does, so ReuseFactory has no purpose anymore.
> One exception: ReuseFactory.getZeroLenByteArray() is still used and provides
> value, as it avoids the allocation cost when an empty byte array is needed.
> The ArrayUtil class is probably just as good a home for it, so I propose we
> move it there and remove the ReuseFactory class.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
