Simone, > a look at put( Class<?> key, T value )[1] implementation of
Aside that put method is public, IIUC the only class that calls "put" is only the OgnlRuntime one (and almost every time it invokes inside a sync block). > ClassCacheImpl: the whole block should be controlled by a concurrency > policy, not only the access to the data structure... WDYT? > The main reason of proposing a TreeMap instead of an LRU cache is > that, in the curent implementation, for each key there could be more > than one value, keeping the multiple values in a kind of inefficient > linked list, that makes inserts/searches inefficient with complexity > of O(n), with TreeMap we can decrease it to O(log n). I'm not sure understand what you mean, how do you think to handle the key collisions (not even TreeMap supports duplicate keys)? At least an HashMap implementation (et similia) can guarantee a lower complexity than TreeMap (unless the order is not important), or am I missing something? I supposed that the new map implementation will replace the _table array, please correct me if I'm wrong. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
