Re: [cp-patches] RFC: Object de-/serialization improvement

2006-08-21 Thread Roman Kennke
Hi there, Jeroen Frijters schrieb: Roman Kennke wrote: What about || (l == VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader()) instead ? You shouldn't call VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader() (it creates a new instance of the system class loader), but apart from that comparing against the system class

RE: [cp-patches] RFC: Object de-/serialization improvement

2006-08-21 Thread Jeroen Frijters
Roman Kennke wrote: Jeroen Frijters schrieb: Roman Kennke wrote: What about || (l == VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader()) instead ? You shouldn't call VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader() (it creates a new instance of the system class loader), but apart from that comparing

RE: [cp-patches] RFC: Object de-/serialization improvement

2006-08-15 Thread Jeroen Frijters
Roman Kennke wrote: Friedjof hacked up the Object de-/serialization code for improved performance. It is now an order of magnitude faster. Thanks. Most of it looks good. A few comments: This looks funny: + {System.err.println(1); I think this is bad style: +catch

RE: [cp-patches] RFC: Object de-/serialization improvement

2006-08-15 Thread Jeroen Frijters
Roman Kennke wrote: This test is wrong: + || (l.getClass().getClassLoader() == null /* application loader */); If an application instantiates URLClassLoader, it should still be garbage collectable. I think that he should consider using a cache that uses weak references

RE: [cp-patches] RFC: Object de-/serialization improvement

2006-08-15 Thread Jeroen Frijters
Roman Kennke wrote: What about || (l == VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader()) instead ? You shouldn't call VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader() (it creates a new instance of the system class loader), but apart from that comparing against the system class loader would work, but I'd much