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

Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by "Peter B. West" <li...@pbw.id.au> on 2005/09/29 08:36:34 UTC

Static methods

Finn,

I noticed that you extracted numeric function methods as statics into a 
class of their own.  Was this for aesthetic or performance reasons?

Peter
-- 
Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/>
Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>

Re: Static methods

Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@pbw.id.au>.

Finn Bock wrote:
> [Peter]
> 
>> I noticed that you extracted numeric function methods as statics into 
>> a class of their own.  Was this for aesthetic or performance reasons?
> 
> 
> The methods in NumericOp? They are called from multiple places which 
> does not have anything in common. So I put the methods in NumericOp to 
> avoid duplication of the few lines in each method.
> 
> There was no performance reasons behind that decision.
> 
> regards,
> finn

Thanks Finn.  I thought it might have been something you had learned 
about JVMs while working on Jython.

Peter
-- 
Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/>
Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>

Re: Static methods

Posted by Finn Bock <bc...@worldonline.dk>.

[Peter]

> I noticed that you extracted numeric function methods as statics into a 
> class of their own.  Was this for aesthetic or performance reasons?

The methods in NumericOp? They are called from multiple places which 
does not have anything in common. So I put the methods in NumericOp to 
avoid duplication of the few lines in each method.

There was no performance reasons behind that decision.

regards,
finn