sebb wrote: > On 29/09/2008, Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ThreadLocals and container classloader environments need careful handling >> to avoid memory leaks. > > I would have thought that was a good reason to keep the class - one > only needs to get the code right once? If you don't use ThreadLocal, the code is much simpler so there is little to be gained by using a utility class. In this case of the two formats that were still used, one class was using each. It makes more sense to me to put the code specific to a class in that class and do away with what was a broken, deprecated and little used utility class.
>> In this case the pain to make sure there wasn't a memory leak wasn't worth >> the gain. > > OK, point taken w.r.t. using synchronisation - the code should be > reasonably quick. > > But why not use an instance variable rather than a static class variable? > If there is more than 1 instance, each instance will have its own lock. > Which may share the load better. Creating the object is likely to be more expensive than using it. True I haven't tested it and if you have performance figures that suggest otherwise then it may be worth changing. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
