I think Johan mentioned it but if memory serves me that was about (de)serialization.
Maurice On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:03 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, I just wanted to make sure. I know someone said something about > holding onto classes was a bad thing in models and stuff. Holding > onto Methods is just as bad, I would assume. > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Maurice Marrink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well the cache is destroyed when the application is destroyed, so > > technically there shouldn't be anything stopping class gc that i can > > think off. > > > > Maurice > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 1:45 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > first of all, are you sure property resolver is your bottleneck? I > > > > really have hard time believing that. > > > > > > > > PropertyResolver already caches the method instances based on target > > > > object class. > > > > > > Does this cause problems with class gc? > > > > > >
