On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > JNDI is nice. It will be slower - a lot slower - and a bit more > memory hungry ... whether this is an issue or not is another thing > altogether.
This could become a big issue, at least the "a lot slower" part. All the crude "are we doing a slow scan" parts in DirectoryScanner are there because Ant 1.1 has simply been too slow when scanning large directory trees. Even now, most time of the javac task will be spent scanning the source tree for files that match **/*.java - the compilation itself will probably be a lot faster (at least when using jikes or modern). <javac>'s perfomance is one of Ant's big pros, so we shouldn't destroy that 8-) Any estimate how bad the performance of JNDI compared to direct file access is? Can we implement a hybrid solution that uses direct file system access when we know that we are talking about plain local files? Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
