Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > Hi Chris, > > (I get an index out of bounds exception on that link ... :-)
FWIW looking at the logs I think you may have mistyped... > That's good news! The best place to get involved in BeanUtils, of course, > is over on commons-dev, but there are lots of interested folks here too. I won't have time to write any code in the next two weeks but I'll try to put together an initial patch soon after that. >> Certainly there is a lot that can be done to improve performance even >> without changing the BeanUtils API at all. I do have in mind some more >> radical changes but those can wait...for example there is not much need >> for DynaBeans when you can dynamically generate real beans. > > I'm interested in both kinds (evolution and revolution) of progress. That's good to hear. Another example of something that would require API changes is moving from static utility methods to instances. For example, instead of: BeanUtils.copy(from, to); // I'm making this up You might use BeanCopier bc = BeanCopier.create(fromClass, toClass); // time passes... bc.copy(from, to); In most frameworks, the types of bean manipulations you will want to do can be determined ahead of time. By holding direct references to the relevant BeanCopier and other similar objects you can avoid a synchronized cache lookup each time you need to do a copy. Chris --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
