http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/719801/diff/1/12 File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/719801/diff/1/12#newcode81 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java:81: for (int i = 0; i < data.length; i++) { On 2010/07/27 19:55:27, scottb wrote:
This loop is just Lists.addAll(this.data, data)
yeah, should probably check that data.length % 2 == 0 http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/719801/diff/1/12#newcode234 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java:234: */ the comments here are now out of date since you no longer need to call init() before calling get(). i think we should just adopt the On Demand Holder idiom here, with the added bonus that we can remove the synchronization overhead. e.g: private static class LazySpeedTracerLoggerHolder { public static SpeedTracerLogger singeleton = new SpeedTracerLogger(); } public static SpeedTracerLogger get() { return LazySpeedTracerLoggerHolder.singleton; } See: http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel/DoubleCheckedLocking.html http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel/jsr-133-faq.html http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/719801/diff/1/12#newcode263 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java:263: SpeedTracerLogger(Writer writer) { note that this constructor is just for unit testing http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/719801/show -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
