I haven't done any benchmarking. But I can't imagine the overhead being "terrible", mesurable: yes, but I hear the reflection stuff in Java is rather quick. If performance is a problem you could probably use some runtime class generation instead. But I imagine it would take a little more effort to assemble such a system.
BR, John On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Casper Bang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But aren't dynproxies terribly slow? I thought that's why people > dabble on invokedynamic. > > /Casper > > On Nov 6, 8:16 pm, "John Nilsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It shouldn't be to hard to implement traits as a library in current Java > > using a dynamic proxy. > > Should make for an interesting project. > > > > BR, > > Jphn > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:00 AM, Mark Derricutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Please please please bring on traits! I'm somewhat on the fence of > rather > > > seeing traits than closures in java sooner than the other. > > > > > I'm finding LOTS of places in my code where traits would just make > things > > > cleaner. > > > > > More and more I think I just want scala :) > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:15 PM, hlovatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >> I thinks that Traits are a great idea for Java and judging by #215 the > > >> posse, particularly Dick, like them. I wrote about them for Java 7 in: > > > > >>http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=220916 > > > > >> What do you think? > > > > > -- > > > "It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code." > -- > > > Bill Harlan > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
