Could you call it FastList2? That avoids name space conflicts. Which makes testing easier.
Is junit sufficient for testing? We could have a directory called snippets where we keep all the classes, which are alternative implementations, appended with a number. If it replaces the original the original can be stored there as FastList0? Peter. ----- Original message ----- > On 2/28/2011 1:38 PM, Peter wrote: > > Hmm valuable insight into the future based on past experience. > > > > Alternate code snippets sitting on the performance shelf need to be > > compilable > > in their own right don't they? > > > > But as you've mentioned, fastlist and its replacement, don't share a common > > interface for testing. > > > > We must test using a common api somewhere, such as the javaspace api, but > > that > > risks duplicating identical code that might diverge over time causing > > inaccurate test results. Divergence is expected as we evolve > > implementations. > > > > I wrote a very simple wrapper interface that was equally smoothly > implemented on top of either of the FastList interfaces. For example, it > uses the visitor pattern which is neutral between the old and new ways > of scanning a list. > > I would not benchmark a base utility through something as big and > complicated as the JavaSpace API. Especially on the relatively small > system I have for benchmarking, other issues could mask differences in > FastList speed. I also don't know enough about the performance > characteristics of the way the QA tests are connected to their servers > to include that in a benchmark of anything else. > > Patricia >
