> -Original Message-
> From: Ara Abrahamian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 22. februar 2002 17:28
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-devel] xjavadoc optimisation+API essay
>
>
> > > Assuming that 80% of templates will g
> > Assuming that 80% of templates will generate new classes instead of
> > mutating an existing class we can definitely make it faster by not
> > instantiating jjtree AST objects. The best solution would be a
runtime
>
> I'm not following here. What kind of templates would want to *modify*
> exi
#inline
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ara
> Abrahamian
> Sent: 22. februar 2002 10:33
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-devel] xjavadoc optimisation+API essay
>
>
> E
Excellent benchmark!
> Here is the strategy:
> We can generate two versions of the parser. One JJTree based, needed
for
> doc
> mutation (XDoclet GUI and Reverse XDoclet) and one JavaCC based used
for
> XDoclet. XDoclet doesn't need to mutate the docs. We can use the same
> grammar, just decide w
I have just added some more benchmarking code. Just run the benchmark
target.
There are now 4 benchmarks within that target. They all scan the xdoclet
sources. (Results from my machine).
1) Runs classic javadoc (using a no-op doclet that only measures time and
prints it to stdout)
4016 ms
2) Ru
