On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:15 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Just curious, why not simply use the same technique in both cases? >> The disambiguator parameter should work find for non-constructor methods, > > right? >> > > Adding the extra parameter means fiddling with the stack to push the > extra null argument. Since non-constructor method invocation occurs > more often, just changing the method name means I'm changing the runtime > behavior less. If you think having two mechanisms is too confusing, I > can make all method invocations use the parameter-based approach. >
Tough call. :( I'll trust your judgement that the speed is worth the extra complexity. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
