[armedbear-devel]  JAR file support patches
evenson at panix.com
Thu Jan 28 14:29:27 UTC 2010
On 1/28/10 1:36 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> 2010/1/28 Mark Evenson<evenson at panix.com>:
>> 3) Possibly reestablish the use ZipCache, although I don't think its a
>> win in its previous form. Maybe something using a timer thread to
>> invalidate? Seems wrong.
> *shudder* starting threads without somebody asking for it is a big
> no-no for a library.
> I find the mention of it appalling.
Yeah, yeah. I hear you loud and clear, as "appalling" certainly
confirms my own aversion to this approach.
Can either you or Erik provide me with a before/after scenario that led
Erik to code ZipCache as it stands? There seems to be little subjective
difference that I can tell loading without ZipCache in my patches.
Alesssio's information about the "hidden" ZipCache in the JVM would
explain this absence of difference, but I would like to at least take a
stab at "proving" that not using it in Load hasn't made a difference.
"A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there
is nothing to compare to it now."
More information about the armedbear-devel