Hi Peter, Joe, On 2014-08-14, Peter Levart wrote: > On 08/14/2014 08:47 AM, Joel Borggren-Franck wrote: > >On 2014-08-13, Joe Darcy wrote: > >>Hi Joel, > >> > >>Does your changeset alter the support (or non-support) of redefining > >>an annotation? > >> > >Hi Joe, > > > >It does not interact with the current non-support and I am convinced it > >wont hinder us in improving the situation. > > > >cheers > >/Joel > Hi Joel, > > Good to see this patch. It improves the efficiency of annotations > caching on methods/constructors. What about fields? They too are > AccessibleObject(s), contain annotations and are copied from root > instances when handed over to the user... > > The difference of behaviour in the presence of class redefinition > could be observed though, but I think this is not a problem. For > example:
Thanks for taking a look at this. You are right about Fields, I added caching for Fields too: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/8054987/webrev.01/ I don't want to rewrite the synchronization in this patch, I'll file a followup RFE for the synchronization and a REF/bug for the publication. cheers /Joel
