On 03/16/2011 11:36 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Am 15.03.2011 23:41, schrieb Rémi Forax:
> [...]
>>> If the callsite is inlined, won't
>>> that mean that then we have those types hard referenced as well and that
>>> I cannot do anything against that?
>> A callsite can be inlined more than once.
>
Am 17.03.2011 19:39, schrieb Charles Oliver Nutter:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
[...]
> I would also be worried, but less so, about the numbers of
> SoftReferences and whether they'd impact GC. A typical app will have
> thousands of call sites, after all.
I think I
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>
> Because of my mistake Charles made the next one and replied only to me,
> wehre as I think he wanted to reply to the list as well. So I attach that
> mail below my answer in full.
Grr. I hate mailing lists that don't reply to list. I d
Because of my mistake Charles made the next one and replied only to me,
wehre as I think he wanted to reply to the list as well. So I attach
that mail below my answer in full.
Am 17.03.2011 17:04, schrieb Charles Oliver Nutter:
[...]
> For us, the cached object is just a tuple of an int and a
>
Am 16.03.2011 20:06, schrieb Charles Oliver Nutter:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>> The result, should I have understood correctly, will be, that each
>> scriptn will cause the former scriptn (lastScript) to be referenced in a
>> way that prefents that from being garb
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> The result, should I have understood correctly, will be, that each
> scriptn will cause the former scriptn (lastScript) to be referenced in a
> way that prefents that from being garbage collected, even though scriptn
> does not reference l
Am 15.03.2011 23:41, schrieb Rémi Forax:
[...]
>> If the callsite is inlined, won't
>> that mean that then we have those types hard referenced as well and that
>> I cannot do anything against that?
>
> A callsite can be inlined more than once.
> So the reference to the mh can not be dropt
I ask be
On 03/15/2011 08:58 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Jochen,
> assuming I have a method call x.foo(a,b), where x is of class X, a of
> class A and b of class B. And let us assume I will create a MethodHandle
> MH: X#foo(A,B). Is it now the case, that unless I don't keep a hard
> reference
Hi all,
assuming I have a method call x.foo(a,b), where x is of class X, a of
class A and b of class B. And let us assume I will create a MethodHandle
MH: X#foo(A,B). Is it now the case, that unless I don't keep a hard
reference to MH anymore, that X, A and B cannot be garbage collected?
If I
