On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 16:43, Glen Mazza wrote:
> --- "J.Pietschmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > But, as Glenn noticed, the attribute names can
> > also be implemented with
> > > enumeration
> > There are no enumerations in pre 1.5 Java. What was
> > meant was that
> > strings denoting XSLFO property enumeration tokens
> > can be interned
> > as the set is of limited and more or less fixed
> > size,
> No I was actually thinking static final variables, my
> reference to "enumerations" was in a generic sense:
> public static final int PROPA = 1;
> public static final int PROPB = 2;
> public static final int PROPC = 3;
> If it is only the property names we were planning on
> interning, then I thought static final variables would
> be faster/more efficient instead.
Given that there are between 249 and 380 names and they
exist in both integer and String format, there isn't a lot
that we can recover here.
If we are after better performance, we must measure to find the
'high runner' and tune from there. To 'design-in' stuff that we
think will be fast is often unproductive. This is why I have been
using JMP to measure performance of FOP and some sample programs.
A high runner in FOP 0.20.5 is: PropertyList.findProperty().
It calls other functions in org.apache.fop.fo that consume
significant CPU resources. In one example it called itself
recursively to a (depth of 10)
One of the reasons I am playing with the SAXTreeValidator program
is as a simplified test bed for the Property implementation. I want to
be able to plug in a new Property implementation and test
it independantly of the rest of FOP.
John Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>