The problems with StringBuilders...

Tue Oct 4 21:45:00 GMT 2005

Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
> Mmm yeah, that's much the same as the IBM paper. They don't say much
> about inheritance. I suppose they have to assume that any (non-final)
> method in a (non-private) class may be overridden, and thus every
> object passed to such a method escapes.

IIRC JET gets to make a closed-world analysis on the pile of bytecode
you put into it to generate the .exe. There might be fallback code
(unoptimized) it reverts back to if you later on load a class which
violates one of the assumptions used in optimization (I have to assume
that they're optimizing for the common case where no new classes are
loaded beyond those compiled into the binary).
 - a
-- 
PGP/GPG: 5C9F F366 C9CF 2145 E770 B1B8 EFB1 462D A146 C380