guten morgen Bene, I have not a strong opinion about it, I am convinced anyway that the original BU authors (BU2 at the beginning was a tentative to refurbish BU) adopted the WeakHashMap NOT with the purpose of implementing a `cache` in the strict sense we are used to. We should go back to the ML history and find related discussions about it to understand that decision.
If we need to switch implementation, in Apache Cocoon we developed a simple LRU cache hacking the LinkedHashMap, we could import and adapt that version - it would be better keeping BU2 dependencies-less. Thanks, -Simo [1] http://s.apache.org/9zN http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Benedikt Ritter <benerit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I just came across this post: > http://www.codeinstructions.com/2008/09/weakhashmap-is-not-cache-understanding.html > Now i'm wondering what you think about it, since we are using the > WeakHashMap for BU2. Maybe we should be looking for an alternative > caching mechanism? > Any suggestions? > > Best regards, > Benedikt > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
