On 21 Mar 2022, at 11:05, ExE Boss wrote: > Actually, this lookup object should probably be kept cached.
+1. Good “cache”.
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v7] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v8] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v9] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v10] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v11] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v11] ExE Boss
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v11] John Rose
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v11] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v11] Daniel Fuchs
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v11] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v12] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v13] Jim Laskey
- Re: RFR: JDK-8282798 java.lang.runtime.Carrier [v14] Jim Laskey
