Hi; Since performance is the same with the workaround, we've got another/different performance issue. Is there any easy way to replicate your test - or at least its essence - ? What does your benchmark do ? What are the evaluated expressions / scripts ?
Back too your note: the 'size' method is discovered through introspection as an overload of the 'size' operator; this creates an entry in a cache for that arithmetic class avoiding to re-discover the operator overloads (Uberspect) on each execution. So, no, this method is not called; it is just meant as a workaround of the bug. Regards -- View this message in context: http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL3-Performance-degradation-compared-to-2-1-1-tp4682086p4682115.html Sent from the Commons - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
