On 05/26/13 08:08, Peter Levart wrote:
Clever idea. So your common TreeNode would extend LinkedHashMap.Entry.
Right. (Or renamings/refactorings of these). And that begets other improvements in part by guaranteeing root is first node of bin, so doesn't need TreeBins (which I cannot do in CHM because links are pinned.) So far, I haven't gotten this to the point of realistically comparing performance etc, and wasn't going to post until I did, but then figured I'd save you some effort.
Another alternative that arises each time deep HashMap surgery is contemplated is that you can almost completely ignore the HashMap implementation inside LinkedHashMap, which is likely to speed both up at the price of more code.
It might be close. There's a bunch of code in HashMap that exists solely to support LinkedhashMap hooks, that would go away. -Doug
