On Tuesday 29 April 2008, Fred Dushin wrote: > Performance measurements would certainly be in order, if a change were > to occur. > > What I'm more concerned about is flushing out any ordering assumptions > in collections that are inherently unordered. That, and > reproducibility of errors on Mac/Windows/Linux/etc
Actually, that brings up the other issue.... The LinkedHashMap and LinkedHashSet collections that provide order based on insertion order. Thus, for each replacement, you would need to determine what IS the order supposed to be if an order is supposed to be maintained. If no order is specified, then it would need to drop to performance comparisons to see if a sorted version is better than a hash version. Dan > On Apr 29, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > > Fred, > > > > I'd be happy to profile any test case in which you think such a case > > would > > help. I'm not really spun up on profiling for working set as opposed > > to CPU, > > but I'm game to try. > > > > --benson -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer, IONA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
