There's an even simpler example of the same optmisiation question. In
compiled obfuscated code, I'm seeing lots of functions that do exactly
nothing. e.g. :
function Id(){}
function Od(){}
function Hd(){}
function Qd(){}
... etc
Why are these here at all? Surely they could be optimised away
--
Thanks Colin, i got it now.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Colin Alworth wrote:
> The compiler will make the methods it can into static calls. As far as
> making an instance static (i.e. making a singleton), this probably won't
> gain you anything for a Cell, which has very little state, but i
The compiler will make the methods it can into static calls. As far as
making an instance static (i.e. making a singleton), this probably won't
gain you anything for a Cell, which has very little state, but in the case
of very large widgets/composites, it might make sense to do.
So Cell, probab
hi,
Is declaring cell widgets variable as static an optimisation ?
OR simply declaring a variable as static is an optimisation or simply it
does not make any difference as per optimisation / performance is concerned.
Kindly suggest.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
I've spent the last day or so trying to figure out why GWT was setting
a non-null String to null for no apparent reason. The code was
essentially as follows:
public void runTest() {
test( "testing" );
}
public void test( String mystring ) {
if( "".equals(mystring) ) {
mystring = null;
On Jan 11, 9:31 am, Brett Morgan wrote:
> On Jan 11, 5:44 pm, "brett.mor...@gmail.com"
> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure where to post this, but this seems like a good place to
> > start.
>
> > I'm looking at the gwt output JS for Wave, and I'm seeing some areas
> > where it could potentially be opti
On Jan 11, 5:44 pm, "brett.mor...@gmail.com"
wrote:
> I'm not sure where to post this, but this seems like a good place to
> start.
>
> I'm looking at the gwt output JS for Wave, and I'm seeing some areas
> where it could potentially be optimised.
>
> The file I'm looking at
> is:https://wave.g
I'm not sure where to post this, but this seems like a good place to
start.
I'm looking at the gwt output JS for Wave, and I'm seeing some areas
where it could potentially be optimised.
The file I'm looking at is:
https://wave.google.com/wave/static/5F358B395590785DC00F5EC2B330C388.cache.js
I r
Ah, that's not a bad idea actually. Using a regex that is… I might
actually try that.
I haven't actually looked at the compiler source yet, but I think I'll
do that tomorrow. I'll update if I come up with anything.
On 6 Maj, 22:00, Alyxandor wrote:
> This is true,
>
> I was thinking of this lat
This is true,
I was thinking of this later, and saw that in many cases, this COULD
be done,
And it can be done outside of the gwt compiler, if you like.
Some fancy regexp to find functions with EXACT method bodies and
renaming+deletion could potentially decrease file sizes dramatically,
but only
are saying is that "if the circumstances where changed
somehow, the optimisation won't work anymore". Well, if that happens,
the GWT compiler wouldn't generate the optimisation anymore.
If dynamic classloading was supported, this wouldn't work of course,
but dynamic classlo
public interface Bax{
public String getValue();
}
public class Bar implements Bax{
String size;
public String getValue(){return size;}
}
public class Foo implements Ba... OH WAIT!!
You have one class returning String, and another returning int.
I was going to say you need to use int
public interface Bax{
public String getValue();
}
public class Bar implements Bax{
String size;
public String getValue(){return size;}
}
public class Foo implements Ba... OH WAIT!!
You have one class returning String, and another returning int.
I was going to say you need to use int
On May 5, 4:19 pm, Salvador Diaz wrote:
> I'm curious about this, could you compile in pretty or detailed and
> show us this duplicate functions ?
I think that would be hard, since it's quite difficult to map a
function to the actual method when looking at the obfuscated output.
However, my po
I'm curious about this, could you compile in pretty or detailed and
show us this duplicate functions ?
Thanks,
Salvador
On May 5, 9:50 am, Elias Martenson wrote:
> When looking at the generated Javascript code in obfuscated mode, I
> can see a lot of functions that, after obfuscation, has beco
When looking at the generated Javascript code in obfuscated mode, I
can see a lot of functions that, after obfuscation, has become
identical to eachother. For example, here is a real example from my
application:
function yLc(a,b,g,f,e,c,d){return 0}
function zLc(a,b,g,f,e,c,d){return 0}
16 matches
Mail list logo
