Hi Tim, I knew I should have left this one for you :-) I don't really remember why/how it got used there in the first place, but I somehow have/had this belief that a final variable was consuming less resources as it seems like a constant. Aren't we even saving a monitor or something? Maybe some CPU time due to the fact that no synchronization is needed? :) If it doesn't bring anything, I think it will be good to clean them in the code to prevent people getting worried. Let me know! Best regards, Jérôme Louvel -- Restlet ~ Founder and Lead developer ~ <http://www.restlet.org/> http://www.restlet.org Noelios Technologies ~ Co-founder ~ <http://www.noelios.com/> http://www.noelios.com
_____ De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Tim Peierls Envoyé : mardi 14 octobre 2008 21:06 À : [email protected] Cc : Jerome Louvel Objet : Re: XmlRepresentation.internalEval On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Jerome Louvel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For the 'final' keyword usage, it might save a bit of memory at most. No big gain here I suspect. How would memory be saved? Are there really compilers that generate different bytecode depending on the presence of the final keyword in this case? try { ... } catch (/*final*/ Exception e) { return null; } The only reason I know to use final in the catch argument declaration is if you need to refer to the exception from an inner class in the catch clause. --tim
