You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to java-dev@axis.apache.org by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> on 2005/11/28 17:23:33 UTC

[axis2] QNames / Strings

1) A lot of places we're currently using QNames (handler names, for 
instance) might be better off using just Strings.

2) There are a ton of "new QName(STRING_CONSTANT)"s speckled about the 
code.  When we really need a QName constant, we should be making a QName 
constant and using that instead of new-ing up an Object each time we run 
through.

--Glen

Re: [axis2] QNames / Strings

Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.

+1

On 11/28/05, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
> 1) A lot of places we're currently using QNames (handler names, for
> instance) might be better off using just Strings.
>
> 2) There are a ton of "new QName(STRING_CONSTANT)"s speckled about the
> code.  When we really need a QName constant, we should be making a QName
> constant and using that instead of new-ing up an Object each time we run
> through.
>
> --Glen
>


--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/

Re: [axis2] QNames / Strings

Posted by Deepal Jayasinghe <de...@opensource.lk>.

big +1 from me

Thanks,
 Deepal
................................................................
~Future is Open~

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glen Daniels" <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>
To: <ax...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 10:23 PM
Subject: [axis2] QNames / Strings


> 1) A lot of places we're currently using QNames (handler names, for 
> instance) might be better off using just Strings.
> 
> 2) There are a ton of "new QName(STRING_CONSTANT)"s speckled about the 
> code.  When we really need a QName constant, we should be making a QName 
> constant and using that instead of new-ing up an Object each time we run 
> through.
> 
> --Glen
>