LGTM

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:26 PM, John Tamplin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Freeland Abbott <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> But, again, it's a nit: my way saves at most ~10b of code size and could
>> gain or lose a few miliseconds in execution time depending on whether branch
>> prediction in the JVM is so far below bytecode interpretation that misses
>> appear free; your way is type-safe for a constant that's both clearly
>> documented as an integral value and likely to change exactly once in its
>> coded lifetime.  What color dresses are the angels on that pin wearing?
>>
>
> Ok, try this patch.
>
> --
> John A. Tamplin
> Software Engineer (GWT), Google
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to