I can't think of any reason *not* to do this, as long as the
references are thread-safe (which almost all will be since they're
declared as local variables within methods). The most likely
candidates for performance gains are the
com.naryx.tagfusion.cfm.engine.* and
com.naryx.tagfusion.expression.function.* packages. I did sort of a
random check within these packages and it looks like most
StringBuffers are used for initialization, the toString() method (used
primarily for debugging), or for creating error messages. This means I
wouldn't expect to see great performance gains. Also, it looks like
someone has gone through and already done some of this, since I found
110 references to StringBuilder.

Bottom line: it's not a bad idea, but I wouldn't expect to see any
significant gains.

Vince

P.S. If you decide to tackle this, you might also want to look at
replacing java.util.Hashtable with java.util.HashMap, for the same
reasons. Again, however, I think this has already been done for most
of the key areas that will affect performance.

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Peter J. Farrell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> I noticed that Open BlueDragon minimum JVM is 1.5 now and I was thinking
> about some basic performance increases that I think should be tested and
> if proven successful be rolled in.
>
> The biggest change is java.util.StringBuffer to
> java.util.StringBuilder.  StringBuffer methods are all synchronized
> where StringBuilder methods they are not.  I did a quick search and it
> looks like StringBuilder could be used in most areas as thread-safety is
> usually not an issue -- especially in things like com.nary.uti.string
> utility or list functions.  I found over 130 places in the Open BD code
> base where the older StringBuffer is used.  Since StringBuilder is a
> drop in replacement for StringBuffer when synchronization is not
> required, I think some significant performance gains in certain
> functions could be made.
>
> I'd be happy to test and do simple bench marks on my personal machine if
> people think this is a worthy path to explore.  I guess I'm looking for
> thoughts on this from somebody on the committee -- don't want to waste
> my time or anybody else's time if has already been explored or not a
> good idea for some reason that I'm not aware of.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best,
> .Peter
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Open BlueDragon Public Mailing List
 http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en
 official site @ http://www.openbluedragon.org/

!! save a network - trim replies before posting !!
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to