All of the scenarios you describe below suggest, then, that so long as a
strong reference is held to the class, the class is not eligible for
unloading. That means, of course, that once all strong references have been
dropped, the class is now eligible for unloading.
Which is exactly how--in
Hi,
I'm a bit hesitant to step in the discussion among such knowledgeable
gentlemen, so forgive me if the suggestion is too naive :-)
The class loader doesn't unload individual classes because they can
hold static members or have static initializers, and unloading the
class may break the
Your idea wouldn't be bad as such, except for few devils in details:
- The code of the java.lang.ClassLoader class (at least in Sun's
implementation) is engineered so that you just can't override the
behaviour where it strongly references each Class object it creates.
- And then there's also
John Wilson wrote:
One thing I have considered is aggregating all these
closures/lambda/etc in a compilation unit as static methods on a
single class. This means that you amortise the cost of a classloader
over several methods. Instances of the function object delegate to the
static method.
On Jan 17, 2008 5:48 PM, John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 17, 2008 6:30 AM, John Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing I have considered is aggregating all these
closures/lambda/etc in a compilation unit as static methods on a
single class. This means that you amortise the
On Jan 17, 2008 4:51 PM, Per Bothner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Wilson wrote:
One thing I have considered is aggregating all these
closures/lambda/etc in a compilation unit as static methods on a
single class. This means that you amortise the cost of a classloader
over several
Adam Bouhenguel wrote:
Why not only allow class unloading only for classes without static
fields, static methods, or static initializers? That side-steps the
initialization issues and means that you need an instance in order to
use it (no static elements + no references = no problem
John Wilson wrote:
wasn't there a problem with Singletons getting GCd?
Like you I think I once knew and have now forgotten. Getting old
If so this would be solved by the no statics requirement. It's
certainly a possible reason why the hard reference exists.
- Charlie
John Cowan wrote:
On Jan 17, 2008 6:30 AM, John Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing I have considered is aggregating all these
closures/lambda/etc in a compilation unit as static methods on a
single class. This means that you amortise the cost of a classloader
over several methods.
On Jan 17, 2008 1:06 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Then we used a hand-written indexed method handle like you describe.
Again, it worked (albeit a bit slower than individual methods), but it
was too much effort to implement by hand and wouldn't work for generated
code.
10 matches
Mail list logo
