Re: Duplicate object prevention policy

2005-12-03 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi Jan, On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 02:58 +0100, Jan Röhrich wrote: > imagine the following case: A method supports the lookup of objects > using a name -> object mapping. The objects are stored in a map but can > easily be newly created instead of performing a real lookup. Shall we > perform this real

Re: Duplicate object prevention policy

2005-11-30 Thread Stephen Crawley
Jan Röhrich wrote: The theoretical answer depends on lots of things, such as: 1) the probable number of times that the method will be called, 2) the likelihood that the lookup (if implemented) will succeed, 3) the cost of creating the object, 4) the cost of the name lookup is, 5) the inc

Re: Duplicate object prevention policy

2005-11-30 Thread Jan Röhrich
> The theoretical answer depends on lots of things, such as: > > 1) the probable number of times that the method will be called, > 2) the likelihood that the lookup (if implemented) will succeed, > 3) the cost of creating the object, > 4) the cost of the name lookup is, > 5) the increme

Re: Duplicate object prevention policy

2005-11-29 Thread Stephen Crawley
Jan Röhrich wrote: Hello list, imagine the following case: A method supports the lookup of objects using a name -> object mapping. The objects are stored in a map but can easily be newly created instead of performing a real lookup. Shall we perform this real lookup even if the newly created obj

Duplicate object prevention policy

2005-11-29 Thread Jan Röhrich
Hello list, imagine the following case: A method supports the lookup of objects using a name -> object mapping. The objects are stored in a map but can easily be newly created instead of performing a real lookup. Shall we perform this real lookup even if the newly created object is equal to the or