Answer inline:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Geir Magnusson Jr.
>
> ........
>
> > > sorry?
> >
> > Now you cache what Iterator you got per Iterator object but it would be
> > more efficient to cache it per listObject's class (listObject being the
> > object to iterate trough in the #foreach).
>
> Nooo.... I don't think so. I think I cache the class and type.
>
> /*
> * if we did figure it out, cache it
> */
>
> if ( type != UNKNOWN )
> {
> icd = new IntrospectionCacheData();
> icd.thingy = new Integer( type );
> icd.contextData = c;
> context.icachePut( this, icd );
> }
Yes but "this", the Foreach object, is the key. It would be more efficient
to have the iterated object's class being the key. You always get the same
iterator a given iterated object class.
> >
> > >...
> > >
> > > > That is a case where I would be better served with an Iterator as
> > > > argument for the #foreach, since an Iterator over a ResultSet is so
> > > > easy to implement.
> > > > =:o)
> > >
> > > I thought I had you above, but I seem to have lost you again : an
> > > Iterator is used in the foreach. I am cleaning up getIterator() a
> > > little as per your's and Jeff's suggestions...
> >
> > Yes, you get Iterator's from object arrays, Collection's and Map's ...
> > ...but what happens if the object to iterate trough in the #foreach is
> > _already_ an Iterator???
>
> ah! yep. good one.
Thanks!
=:o)
> > > > Have fun,
> > > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Always do!
> > >
> > > geir
> >
> > Doing my best to have it here too,
> > =:o)
>
> *Thrilled* to hear it. :)
>
> geir
=:o)
Paulo
