On 3 June 2011 16:29, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 3, 2011, at 11:10 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> I'm tired of being in the middle of this.  Please discuss this on the owb 
>> dev list or in comments to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-579
>
> :)
>
>>
>> The problem in owb is that although the actual proxy building code has no 
>> problems with the final synthetic methods, there's an excessively naive 
>> check for proxyability that just looks at all declared methods and checks 
>> they aren't final.  Based on this example, I think there may be a  lot of 
>> existing code with similar errors that works fine in most situations but 
>> will not work with aries.
>
> I'm worried about this, also.
>
> IIUC, complexity has been added to detect the classes so that we can make 
> these methods 'final' -- not for semantic understanding, but in the hopes of 
> improved JIT behavior. As you note, there is the potential that this will 
> cause incompatibilities/problems with other libraries.

I think Richard gave other reasons as to why these methods should be
marked final. So it isn't just around performance.

>
> That said, it does seem that there is a performance advantage (though 
> appararently small). Here's information I got from Derek Inglis, JIT 
> Development Lead at IBM, which I'm sharing with his permission:
>
>> Marking methods final does give JIT performance improvements for IBM JVM and 
>> Oracle's JVMs.   Having said that much of the JIT work over the years has 
>> been to decrease the overhead associated with nonfinal methods, such that 
>> the advantage of final has decreased.   In summary, I would encourage using 
>> final on methods, however the advantage for a small number of methods, isn't 
>> big enough to worry about if avoiding final for those methods solves other 
>> issues.
>>
>> I'll commit a fix to owb too so everyone is unhappy.  if you folks can 
>> convince the owb folks that the methods should be final I'll put the final 
>> back in aries.
>
> I'll join in on the discussion, there...
>
> --kevan



-- 
Alasdair Nottingham
[email protected]

Reply via email to