yes, you are right. Thanks for catching this, I'll fix it asap. LieGrue, strub
----- Original Message ---- > From: Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Sent: Tue, July 27, 2010 9:38:19 PM > Subject: Re: svn commit: r979269 - in /openwebbeans/trunk: >webbeans-el10/src/main/java/org/apache/webbeans/el10/ >webbeans-impl/src/main/java/org/apache/webbeans/el/ > > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 9:10 AM, <strub...@apache.org> wrote: > > Author: struberg > > Date: Mon Jul 26 13:10:33 2010 > > New Revision: 979269 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=979269&view=rev > > Log: > > OWB-425 OWB EL performance improvement > > > > txs 2 gpetracek for the patch! > > > > > + public Object findBeanByName(String name) > > + { > > + Object cachedBean = normalScopedObjects.get(name); > > + > > + if(cachedBean != null) > > + { > > + return cachedBean; > > + } > > + > > + Bean<?> dependentBean = beanNameToDependentBeanMapping.get(name); > > + > > + if(dependentBean == null) > > + { > > + return null; > > + } > > + return dependentObjects.get(dependentBean); > > + } > > + > > Rohit and I were looking at this offline, and it seems like this > should have a .getObject() on this final line -- otherwise the Object > returned here is a CreationalStore. > > >> private Map<Bean<?>, CreationalStore> dependentObjects = new > HashMap<Bean<?>, CreationalStore>(); > > The similar names and dissimilar values of the dependent and normal > scoped hash maps is probably confusing here. >